This is page numbers 3237 - 3260 of the Hansard for the 18th Assembly, 3rd Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was budget.

Mr. Testart's Reply
Replies to Budget Address

Kieron Testart

Kieron Testart Kam Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is the third budget of the 18th Legislative Assembly, and the third time that Members have gone through the painstaking process of reviewing the draft budget and providing detailed input to the Minister of Finance and his Cabinet colleagues. I have to say, I am beginning to wonder why we bother.

Before I comment on the 2018-2019 Budget, let me say a few words for those who might be listening, about the role of the Regular Members in the business planning process. I think it is important to explain this process to members of the public. Although this government talks a lot about transparency, the business planning process remains shrouded in secrecy. I will come back to the topic of secrecy later, but for now, let me set out the process and the role Regular Members play in the budget cycle.

From our perspective the important stages of the budget planning process are:

• The development of the government’s fiscal strategy;

• The development and review of the business plans;

• The budget address; and

• The presentation and review of the main estimates in the Legislative Assembly.

The GNWT’s business planning process occurs on an annual cycle. It all starts with the development of the government’s fiscal strategy.

This strategy is established by the Finance Minister in consultation with his Cabinet colleagues. It is developed by considering the GNWT’s projected financial position based on a set of assumptions about revenues, expenditures, and federal transfer payments, and by considering parameters such as the government’s federally set borrowing authority and its own Fiscal Responsibility Policy. The government comes to some decision about how much of a surplus it wants to carry, how much debt it can responsibly manage, and how to meet those objectives by balancing revenues with expenses. Once established, it is used by the Financial Management Board to set budget targets for each department.

Regular Members have some impact in shaping the fiscal strategy, but because it is ultimately the government’s strategy, we must often resort to political pressure to effect any meaningful change. Two years ago, at the beginning of this Assembly, the GNWT started out with a fiscal strategy based on deep budgetary cuts to the tune of $150 million in the first year alone. The Regular Members objected strongly to this approach, which, as anyone could see, was clearly based on drastic austerity measures, even though the Finance Minister said it was not.

Regular Members were not convinced that deep budget cuts were realistic or necessary, and we were concerned about their impact on our fragile northern economy, already destabilized by low commodity prices and flat population growth. We were told, however, by the honourable Minister of Finance that two years of belt-tightening would be followed by two years of greater spending. The cynic in me could not help but notice that this freer spending would conveniently occur in the lead-up to the next election.

Regular Members advocated instead for a more balanced approach. In fact, we brought forward a motion in the House to have the $150 million reduction target removed from the government’s mandate. Although this motion was carried, the target was nonetheless still touted in the Finance Minister’s 2016 Budget Address, and it continues to reverberate in this year’s budget.

In considering the context for business planning, it is important to note that the budget we are now considering is the GNWT’s operating budget. There is a separate process for reviewing the government’s capital infrastructure budget, but the two are intrinsically linked by the government’s Fiscal Responsibility Policy.

This policy requires the government to fund at least 50 per cent of its capital infrastructure investments from the operating budget surpluses generated by government departments alone, excluding the boards, agencies, and Crown corporations that, for accounting purposes, make up the larger government reporting entity. What all this means is that if the government is going to afford the big-ticket infrastructure projects it wants to undertake, it must it must do so by reducing spending on vital programs and services.

We are not talking about modest capital infrastructure spending. According to this government's 2018-2019 Capital Estimates, the money allocated and spent on infrastructure from April 1, 2016, to March 31, 2019, totals $998,765,000. That is almost a billion dollars in capital spending over three years, of which 50 per cent was or will be financed by this government through reduced spending and cuts to health care, education, and social development.

Mr. Speaker, now that we have this fiscal environment in mind, it sets the context within which the government’s current business plans were developed and reviewed by the standing committees over an intensive three-week period in November 2017.

There are four standing committees that work collaboratively to complete this review. The three envelope committees, the Standing Committee on Government Operations, the Standing Committee on Social Development, and the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment, share the work of reviewing the business plans of the GNWT’s 10 departments and the NWT Housing Corporation. The committees make recommendations for changes to the business plans that are forwarded to the individual departments through the Minister of Finance.

The role of the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning, which is composed of all Regular Members, is to review and prioritize the recommendations coming from the envelope committees that have a dollar impact on the budget; to make additional recommendations as needed; and to ensure that nothing has been overlooked.

It is a significant undertaking for the standing committees and their staff to carry out this work. In fact, we estimate that about 1,300 person hours were spent on the business plan review alone. The three envelope committees made a combined total of 142 recommendations and requests for further information, all with a view to improving the 2018-2019 Budget and the overall operations of the government. In that regard, I should note that not all of these recommendations are related to the financial aspects of the budget. Many have to do with improving how information is presented and how the government organizes and prioritizes its work.

The Standing Committee on Social Development made 62 recommendations, including a safe-house pilot project for women and children fleeing family violence in communities without shelters; and a request to the Department of Education, Culture and Employment to reverse all proposed reductions to the Social Work Diploma program and the Teacher Education Program and restore regular enrolment and program operations.

The Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment made 42 recommendations, including ensuring adequate funding in Industry, Tourism and Investment’s budget for the Business Development and Investment Corporation and for the Boreal Caribou Monitoring Program; and urging the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to make more substantive progress on the Climate Change Strategic Framework.

The Standing Committee on Government Operations, the committee for which I serve as Chair, made 38 recommendations, including requests that support for the Non-Governmental Organization Stabilization Fund administered by Municipal and Community Affairs be increased; that the GNWT support the establishment of more Single Window Service Centres staffed by Government Services Officers; and that the Ministers responsible for specialized portfolios be included in the Business Plan Review and be available to answer the standing committee’s questions; an important step, in the committee’s view, towards greater accountability by this government.

Overall, the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning, often referred to as P and P, made 39 recommendations and requests for information, some of which echoed the recommendations coming from the envelope committees. Some of these recommendations came in the form of opposition to proposed budget cuts and new funding proposals by the government, including opposition to:

• A proposed reduction of $475,000 to ECE’s budget that would have been used for school counselors;

• A proposed reduction of $150,000 to ENR’s Boreal Caribou Monitoring program;

• A proposed reduction of $925,000 to ITI’s budget for the Business Development and Investment Corporation;

• A proposed reduction to MACA’s multisport games funding of $650,000 over three years, with the first cut being $250,000 in 2018-2019; and

• The proposed addition of $387,000 to fund the GNWT’s office in Ottawa.

Additionally, P and P sought new funding for under-resourced programming, including:

• A $500,000 increase to support for the NWT Arts Council;

• $100,000 for a touring artist grant program; and

• $300,000 to establish Single Window Service Centres, staffed by Government Services officers, in two smaller communities and in Yellowknife.

Mr. Speaker, having conducted a thorough review resulting in detailed, cogent recommendations from the standing committees, Regular Members broke for the holidays, secure in the knowledge that we had done our jobs and confident that our hard work to improve this budget would be accepted by our Cabinet colleagues.

Alas, Mr. Speaker, our confidence was clearly misplaced, as we learned when the standing committees had the opportunity to confidentially review the draft main estimates in January. These are the same draft main estimates that were tabled in the House after the Minister of Finance delivered his budget address last week.

Mr. Speaker, the Regular Members look eagerly to the main estimates to see if the labour we put into reviewing the business plans has borne fruit. What did we find there? Well, contrary to the advice of the standing committees, we found:

• A reduction of $475,000 to ECE’s budget that would have been used for school counselors;

• A reduction of $150,000 to ENR’s Boreal Caribou Monitoring program;

• A reduction of $925,000 to ITI’s budget for the BDIC;

• A $250,000 reduction to MACA’s multisport games funding; and

• The addition of $387,000 to fund the GNWT’s office in Ottawa.

What did we fail to find, Mr. Speaker? We failed to find:

• The requested $500,000 increase to support for the NWT Arts Council;

• $100,000 for a new touring artist grant program;

• $150,000 in additional funding for the NGO Stabilization Fund; or

• $300,000 to establish three new Single Window Service Centres

All of which were recommended by the standing committees.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot begin to tell you how frustrating it is for Members on this side of the House to see such a poor response to our recommendations.

Not a single one of the standing committees’ recommendations with financial implications was included in the draft main estimates. Not one.

The requests made by the standing committees totalled somewhere in the vicinity of $2.9 million out of a total budget in excess of $1.7 billion dollars These were not unreasonable or exorbitant requests; they total less than two-tenths of 1 per cent of the budget. Our requests were modest in their amount, consistent with the government’s mandate and important to our constituents. What is a mere $2.9 million dollars to enhance program spending, as compared with a same-year capital budget estimated at $237 million? Cabinet couldn’t meet us partway. In fact, I have to wonder if they even bothered to review the standing committees’ input at all before printing the draft estimates.

You know, Mr. Speaker, it has been said that the leader sets the tone for a whole organization. When our Premier made a pitch to this Assembly to be considered for the office of the Honourable Premier for an historic second term, he said something that resonated with a lot of newly elected Members. He said, "During this election, it was clear to me that people were tired of adversarial politics and what was perceived as petty infighting. The Northwest Territories residents deserve a government that is focused on making good public policy, not scoring political points. I believe all of us here share that view, and I am committed to working with Regular Members to establish a new, more cooperative approach."

Let me ask you this, Mr. Speaker: do you think a reasonable person would consider Cabinet’s response to our budget requests indicative of a cooperative approach? I think not. Rather than cooperation, rather than good public policy, this Cabinet chose to force the hand of Regular Members. This is what necessitated the deferral of the budgets of the Department of Executive and Indigenous Affairs and the Department of Education, Culture and Employment earlier this week, to give Members time to negotiate with Cabinet behind the scenes to get a better deal on this budget.

I am encouraged at this point in time that these discussions will result in some concessions on the part of Cabinet, but I want to remind the Premier of the commitment he made to every single one of the Members in this House to do business in a new, more cooperative way.

On that note, Mr. Speaker, I want to return to the subject of budget secrecy. There is a tradition of secrecy surrounding the development of budgets in Westminster-style parliaments. John Fraser, Speaker of the House of Commons, explained this tradition in a 1987 parliamentary debate. He said, "Budgetary secrecy is a matter of parliamentary convention. Its purpose is to prevent anybody from gaining a private advantage by reason of obtaining advance budgetary information."

It was also touched upon in a 1976 budget address by the Liberal Minister of Finance Donald McDonald who noted that "the tradition of budget secrecy has two grounds. It is intended to deny to anyone financial advantage from advance information. It is intended to ensure that important statements of government economic policy are disclosed first to Members of the House of Commons." At that time, Minister McDonald suggested that "the time has come to consider whether some of the long-standing traditions that surround the budgetary process should be modified to serve better the needs of today."

As true as that may have been for the federal government in 1976, I believe it is even more relevant for the Government of the Northwest Territories in 2018. This is a consensus system, Mr. Speaker, built on traditions of respect, cooperation, and the sharing of information; principles that seem antithetical to the notion of secrecy. Also, as important as the GNWT’s budget is to the people of the Northwest Territories, openness about proposed budget measures is unlikely to result in disruption to currency or stock markets or to anyone gaining tax advantages.

In fact, budget secrecy is, in some ways, an anachronism inherited from the British parliamentary system that is out of step with today’s technologically fast-paced world. It inhibits consultation, it is contradictory to transparency, and, as it has been said, "does not take account of the broad economic and social role which modern budgets must play." I believe it is time for this Assembly to consider the role of budget secrecy in our proceedings and to move to a more transparent and open process, so that the people of the Northwest Territories can see exactly what work their MLAs and Cabinet Ministers are doing for them. That would be consistent with the more cooperative approach that the Premier promised us at the start of this Assembly.

There are some things about this budget that trouble me. You have heard those. The budget is irresponsibly silent on the carbon tax and cannabis revenues and how these stack up against the costs of administering the new sales system. The Government of Canada expects revenues of $400 million and costs of $700 million. Surely, the situation is similar here in the NWT. This shows the GNWT still doesn’t have a real plan to deal with cannabis or carbon.

I am concerned about the slow pace of legislative progress by this government, Mr. Speaker. I am concerned that it has left too much work to be done in the last two years, which will force standing committees to rush through their reviews of bills, as we have already been asked to do on the cannabis legislation. I am troubled by the fact that we have yet to see legislation to establish the Office of the Ombudsman, legislation that the GNWT promised in its mandate to introduce the first two years of this Assembly.

However, I want to close on a positive note, by pointing out that there are things in this budget that I am glad to see, such as new funding for friendship centres; additional resources for the settlement of lands, resources, and self-government agreements; increased investment in benefits to seniors, elders, and the working poor; and the continued support for mining exploration and investment, but most importantly, that there are no new tax increases being proposed. I am also hopeful that, before this week is out, Cabinet and Regular Members will come to an agreement on some outstanding matters arising from the standing committee’s recommendations.

I’m glad Cabinet is waking up to the need to develop our economy and make strategic investments to create jobs and growth. Regular Members have been making these points for the last two years. As we review the individual department’s budgets in Committee of the Whole, I will have more specific, detailed comments on the budget in the days to come. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Testart's Reply
Replies to Budget Address

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. Replies to budget address, day 6 of 7. Member for Yellowknife North.

Mr. Vanthuyne's Reply
Replies to Budget Address

Cory Vanthuyne

Cory Vanthuyne Yellowknife North

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in reply to the Minister of Finance’s budget address from last Thursday. Over the past two years my replies have been somewhat critical of the Minister’s budgets. This year I am pleased to say that, in general, the budget address gives me some optimism that we are heading in the right direction. Before we get too excited, let me say that it is also apparent that we still have plenty of work to do.

Earlier in the 18th Assembly we confronted what I called a "doomsday scenario," where Cabinet was convinced that austerity measures with massive cuts and job reductions were needed to save us from the poorhouse. Mr. Speaker, it was creativity and compromise that got us past that approach, not entirely unscathed, but with a happier outlook and a belief that positive change in the direction of our mandate was possible. Now today we are moving forward, but I am still feeling some reluctance toward taking truly bold steps. Bold steps are exactly what is required to move us ahead with some of our serious challenges.

So I want to take us back to a "principles first" approach rather than the "purse first" approach. Mr. Speaker, a society is not measured wholly by its GDP, by the latest oil prices, or by the rate in which innovation thrives. It is simply, quite frankly: a society is measured by its people. Mr. Speaker, it is measured by how our families are doing; how children and youth are doing in school; how is our health and well-being is in our communities. Sadly, on many fronts, we continue to show that we are struggling as a society when measured by these means. The NWT continues to have some of the highest rates of incarceration in the country. Our unemployment rates in the communities still remain a constant concern. Many students are still not at the grade levels and graduation rates that we would expect in this day and age. Too many people continue to suffer from challenges surrounding mental health and addictions.

Mr. Speaker, the reason I raise these points is because the cost-benefit analysis of our investments, no matter if they are in infrastructure or programs and services, at the end of the day, they must show benefits to our children, our families, our elders, and our communities. How well our people are doing is the measure that matters most. That is the bottom line.

Mr. Speaker, there is one area that we will have to face and invest in significantly in over the coming years, whether we care to or not. We simply don’t have a choice. The most important challenge facing us -- in fact, the world -- is climate change. Across the globe, it is affecting employment, health, migration, food security, world ecosystems, and world population. We are feeling it first and most drastically here in the North.

I believe the government recognizes the drastic nature of this challenge. I commend the government for that acknowledgement by signing on to the Pan Canadian Framework for Clean Growth and Climate Change. The $1.2 million allocated for climate change resilience and adaptation is important and very much welcomed. That said, only a few people in the public service and few resources are specifically assigned to the climate change file, Mr. Speaker. That is troubling because this critical global issue deserves much stronger resolve and much faster action than we have seen so far. I am hopeful that our Climate Change Framework will outline an aggressive approach to tackling this global challenge and that the government arms our departments with adequate resources to take on this daunting task.

Mr. Speaker, we know that mining is indeed the backbone of the economy. We have what the world needs in minerals and metals that will help sustain life on this earth. I say that with all seriousness. The world continues to move faster and faster into the realm of innovation and technology. The advancement of developing countries is at an all-time high. Our resources will be sought to support those advancements.

The government recognizes the importance of this and support for developing our own mineral exploration and development regime is important to attracting investment. I commend the government for moving forward with the Mineral Resources Act. To the same end, I do not take our environment lightly. We can look into any corner of our territory and see multiple scars with regard to contamination and past abuse of our lands and water. From those experiences, we have become much better at protecting our environment, and we are working with Indigenous governments, various regulatory bodies, and industry to put ourselves at the forefront of protecting our precious ecosystems.

It is with that proven ability to protect our environment that we must know when to apply common sense toward our regulatory requirements for exploration. Regulations should match the degree of impact. Exploration need not be treated with the same regulations as an operating mine. Let’s promote exploration while applying the appropriate measures to protect our environment.

Still on the resources front, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, all indicators for the future of oil development in the North have signified that this prospect is bleak, but there are areas of potential that aren’t mentioned. Since oil is on its last years in the Sahtu, in particular, Norman Wells, there will be a major need for rehabilitation in that region. That opportunity could be a years-long project with a similar spending impact as the rehabilitation of Giant Mine. There will be opportunities for generational employment. We must be ready to accept the challenge, preserve the land, and reap the rewards.

Similarly, rather than bemoaning that Beaufort Oil "is stranded" in the Northern Sea, we should be seeking ways to exploit inland gas for the benefit of our own communities in that region. Using our own local resources to get off trucked fuels, lower our carbon footprint, and provide cheaper energy only makes sense.

Mr. Speaker, the South Slave region was once a thriving hub for agriculture in the NWT and fed many communities with fresh food up and down the valley. I believe we can get there once again, not only in the South Slave but throughout our entire territory. I appreciate that funding for the Agriculture Strategy was included in the Minister’s address. Access to land is an important step, but it should be emphasized that not only must land be made available, it must also be made affordable if we are to see this sector truly grow and flourish.

I was somewhat discouraged to see limited mention of other economic areas that deserve the government’s active and deliberate support. A truly diversified economy will have to include increased support for the creative arts industry. Our outdated Arts Strategy needs work to become modernized with the times. Let’s make the commitment to engage our creative communities and seek to update the Arts Strategy.

Support for developing centres of excellence and the knowledge economy will be critical so we can take advantage of the creativity and the talents of our people, and create made-in-the-North innovations and technologies. We must remain strong on support for our traditional land- and water-based activities that enhance and celebrate our vibrant Indigenous cultures. Other diversification opportunities will require that we be flexible and responsive to changing times and take full advantage of new prospects, such as when cannabis is legalized later this year. People, businesses, and communities will be frustrated if only a few get to capitalize from this opportunity. We must waste no time in distributing the wealth when it comes to these new-found profits.

Tourism: this is perhaps the brightest light in our economic horizon, and it deserves our continued investment. In support of tourism, we need to ensure that there is no gap in the provision of visitors’ services in Yellowknife. It is also high time that we fast-track changes to the CTV Act to allow municipalities to implement a hotel levy, so they can develop their own destination marketing organizations and enjoy the gains that come from this thriving industry.

Mr. Speaker, another priority for fast-tracking is our land rights negotiations. While the Premier was able to offer an optimistic report on the progress of land rights negotiations last year, we have not heard anything new recently. I commend the $1 million in funding that the government has set aside for this high priority, but we must commit to progress. Mr. Speaker, I don’t need to emphasize, as I have before, that a vast majority of our other mandate priorities hinge on the certainty that will be created by the resolution of land rights.

There was so much hope at the beginning of the Assembly that land management would be a priority, but regrettably, land use plans are also taking far too long. The Yellowknife Periphery Recreational Land Use Plan was to be completed in the second year of this Assembly, but is still not done. Other important land use plans seem equally hung up. As one example: how do we promote agricultural development when land use and allocation remain undefined and unclear?

I have long supported our three major roadway projects, the Mackenzie Valley highway, the Whati all-season road, and the road into the Slave Geological Province. I support our road projects not only because they will help us develop our resource potential, but because they will lower the costs of living and create long-term generational opportunities for employment and small business. This is essential in so many ways to our small communities.

Another major contributor to the cost of living is the high cost of power across this territory. Power is not easy, Mr. Speaker, and we face more challenges than almost anywhere, but we need to continue to explore alternatives. Hydro is important to develop, and connecting to the southern grid is a strong long-term option, but it’s only one option. Let’s not put all our energy eggs in one basket. We have had success in developments of wind power at Diavik and solar power in Colville Lake. The City of Yellowknife’s district heating initiative will soon be paying off. Biomass silos have quickly become a common sight in many communities. Even electric cars can now be utilized in the North, and we should be providing charging stations along the highway. All of these areas have potential and need to be emphasized and supported. I want to see an energy strategy that significantly reduces our reliance on fossil fuels, commits us to protecting the environment, and, most importantly, lowers the cost of living for Northerners.

Mr. Speaker, we followed the lead of our electorate and entered the 18th Assembly with a commitment to creating a government of openness and transparency. I applaud the government for the steps that it has taken. Public hearings, better communication with the public, Cabinet meetings in the regions, and more recently the Minister of Finance’s commitment the public overview of the budget process; these are all important steps forward, and many in my riding have appreciated the steps that have been taken.

Again, Mr. Speaker, there is more that we should be doing. Specifically, I would argue that the business planning process needs to be open to public participation. As an MLA providing feedback to government, I would appreciate being able to gather valuable, informed input from my constituents. That would allow me to offer more constructive and valuable feedback to this government, improving the planning process overall. It is frustrating, to say the least, when MLAs have been pitched by departments as to what the government intends to do in the coming year, yet we are not at liberty to go out and consult with constituents and get their thoughts and feedback. This is a backward approach, and we need to make new and open and transparent ways to deliberate on the business plans.

We also need to improve our practices with regard to bureaucracy and red tape. I know that we are hearing encouraging signals from industry, but we still carry the dubious reputation as the most over-regulated jurisdiction in Canada. As we heard with some energy in this Chamber yesterday, our procurement policies have earned us an "F" grade from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. This kind of inefficiency discourages investment from outside and frustrates home-grown entrepreneurship. Let’s focus on streamlining services, reviewing our procurement policies, and working towards achieving at least a "D" grade next year.

The speed of the legislation to which the 18th Assembly committed itself is very discouraging. I could go on and on here, but simply: where is the long-promised legislation to establish the Office of the Ombudsman? In the name of transparency, get it done already.

Mr. Speaker, part of achieving any ambitious mandate must be to build and lead a great team. To that end, we have a strong workforce in our government, comprised of talented, capable public servants. As any management professional will tell you, what people want is the opportunity to do their best work, utilize their talents, and make a contribution, but we have been without a collective agreement for over two years. To move forward with our team, we must settle our differences without delay and provide certainty and a path forward.

Mr. Speaker, there are many positive things in this budget on which I commend this government. The commitment of additional funding to junior kindergarten is important. Inclusive schooling in JK is a very important investment in the future, as is the inclusion of mental health support in our schools.

Support for long-term and home care, emphasis on dealing with addictions, help for youth in crisis; these are all very important priority areas. I also commend the government, in partnership with the City of Yellowknife, for committing funding for a sobering centre in Yellowknife.

I will make two final points, Mr. Speaker. The first is that we know a carbon tax is in our future. We must not allow a new tax to be a burden on our future. We must ensure that a carbon regime in the Northwest Territories is northern friendly and revenue neutral. Where our residents need to pay more, we must find a way to return it to them. The achievements of this tax must be a cleaner planet, yes, but not a higher cost of living for our people.

The second point is that we must be prepared to meet our end of the federal infrastructure investment. Half a billion dollars in federal money will be coming to the NWT over the next 10 years. We must not miss out. We must be prepared to match those dollars with our own and see it as a crucial investment in our upcoming generations.

Mr. Speaker, it is hard to believe that we are more than halfway through our term, but I still come to work every day with the same optimism I started with. The challenges are daunting, but our achievements are significant. We should not be bound by the limitations of the past, but be inspired by the courage of possibility and the faith placed in us by our constituents to build a better future. Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged by what I heard in the Minister of Finance’s address, and notwithstanding that we have considerable debate before us, on the surface I am hopeful that, in the end, I can get up and support this budget. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Vanthuyne's Reply
Replies to Budget Address

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. Replies to budget address, day 6 of 7. Item 12, petitions. Item 13, reports of standing and special committees. Item 14, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 15, tabling of documents. Minister of Finance.

Robert C. McLeod

Robert C. McLeod Inuvik Twin Lakes

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following two documents entitled "Follow-up Letter to Oral Question 50-18(3): Impact of Collapse of Carillion on Stanton Renewable Project"; and, further to my Return to Written Question 4-18(3), a document entitled "Stanton Territorial Hospital Project Cash Flow." Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. Tabling of documents. Item 16, notices of motion. Item 17, notices of motion for first reading of bills. Minister of Justice.

Bill 5: An Act To Amend The Summary Conviction Procedures Act
Notices of Motion for First Reading of Bills

Louis Sebert

Louis Sebert Thebacha

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Wednesday, February 21, 2018, I will move that Bill 5, An Act to Amend the Summary Conviction Procedures Act, be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Bill 5: An Act To Amend The Summary Conviction Procedures Act
Notices of Motion for First Reading of Bills

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. Notices of motion for first reading of bills. Item 18, motions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Julie Green

Julie Green Yellowknife Centre

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Great Slave, that notwithstanding rule 4, when this House adjourns on February 15, 2018, it shall be adjourned until Tuesday, February 20, 2018;

AND FURTHER that at any time prior to February 20, 2018, if the Speaker is satisfied after consultation with the Executive Council and Members of the Legislative Assembly, that the public interest requires that the House should meet at an earlier time during the adjournment, the Speaker may give notice and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its business as it has been duly adjourned to that time. Mahsi.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. The motion is in order. All those in favour? All those opposed?

---Carried

Masi. Motions. Item 19, first reading of bills. Item 20, second reading of bills. Item 21, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Minister's Statement 1-18(3), North Slave Correctional Complex Inmate Concerns; Minister's Statement 19-18(3), Aurora College Foundational Review Process; Tabled Document 63-18(3), Main Estimates 2018-2019, with the Member for Sahtu in the chair.

Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters

The Chair

The Chair Daniel McNeely

Calling committee to order. What is the wish of committee? Mr. Testart.

Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters

Kieron Testart

Kieron Testart Kam Lake

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that the chair of the Committee of the Whole leave the chair and report progress.

Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters

The Chair

The Chair Daniel McNeely

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. The motion is on the floor to report progress. The motion is in order and is non-debatable. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

I will rise and report progress. Thank you.

Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

May I have the report, Member for Sahtu?

Report of Committee of the Whole
Report of Committee of the Whole

February 14th, 2018

Daniel McNeely

Daniel McNeely Sahtu

Mr. Speaker, your committee has been considering Minister's Statement 1-18(3), North Slave Correctional Complex Inmate Concerns; Minister's Statement 19-18(3), Aurora College Foundational Review Process; Tabled Document 63-18(3), Main Estimates 2018-2019, and would like to report progress. Mr. Speaker, I move that the report of the Committee of the Whole be concurred with. Mahsi.

Report of Committee of the Whole
Report of Committee of the Whole

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. Do we have a seconder? Member for Kam Lake. The motion is in order. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Item 23, third reading of bills. Item 24, orders of the day.

Orders of the Day
Orders of the Day

Deputy Clerk Of The House (Ms. Kay)

Mr. Speaker, the orders of the day for Monday, February 20, 2018, at 1:30 p.m.:

1. Prayer

2. Ministers' Statements

3. Members' Statements

4. Reports of Standing and Special Committees

5. Returns to Oral Questions

6. Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery

7. Acknowledgements

8. Oral Questions

9. Written Questions

10. Returns to Written Questions

11. Replies to Commissioner's Opening Address

12. Replies to Budget Address (Day 7 of 7)

13. Petitions

14. Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills

15. Tabling of Documents

16. Notices of Motion

17. Notices of Motion for First Reading of Bills

18. Motions

19. First Reading of Bills

20. Second Reading of Bills

21. Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters

- Minister's Statement 1-18(3), North Slave Correctional Complex Inmate Concerns

- Minister's Statement 19-18(3), Aurora College Foundational Review Process

- Tabled Document 63-18(3), Main Estimates 2018-2019

1. Report of Committee of the Whole

2. Third Reading of Bills

3. Orders of the Day

Orders of the Day
Orders of the Day

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi, Mr. Clerk. This House stands adjourned until Tuesday, February 20, 2018, at 1:30 p.m.

---ADJOURNMENT

The House adjourned at 3:19 p.m.