Question has been called. All those in favour. All those opposed. The motion is carried.

---Carried

Ms. Green.

Thank you, colleagues. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that this assembly create an election rebate for candidates who receive at least 5 percent of the votes cast in her or his electoral district in the NWT, reimbursing 50 percent of eligible personal election expenses up to a maximum rebate amount of $3,000. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Green. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Ms. Green.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Many women told us that paying for a campaign is a major barrier to them deciding to become a candidate. We looked at rebate schemes across the country and used that information to create our recommendation, which I have to tell you is unique in the country since it is a recommendation that applies to independent candidates rather than those in parties.

First, we set the threshold to qualify for a rebate low. Candidates only have to earn 5 percent of the vote to be eligible for a rebate. Second, the expenses eligible for the rebate exclude cash and in-kind donations but do include the money the candidate spent from his or her own pocket on the campaign. We set a cap at 50 percent rebate on these expenses because it is one of the most generous rebates available in the country in this scheme and the cost to government, given the 2015 election results, would be about $60,000. If there was no cap, so if expenses were rebated in full, the cost to government would jump to $163,000.

Mr. Chair, as you see in Appendix C of the report, we looked at the option of providing a rebate of 50 percent on up to $10,000 worth of expenses. We ultimately decided against this number because so few people spend enough to require this greater reimbursement. In fact, it would have been just four candidates in the last election. Reimbursement at this level would favour those who spend more and can afford to wait for a rebate, in other words, candidates who probably don't need our help in the first place.

The option we chose was to rebate 50 percent of $6,000 in expenses because it reflects the level at which most candidates spend. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that Committee Motion 142-18(3) be amended by striking out the words "up to a maximum rebate of $3,000." Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Testart. There is a motion to amend on the floor. The motion to amend is in order. To the motion to amend. Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. To the parent motion, I am very supportive of this, but I wanted to address a concern here. The mover of the motion addressed the rationale behind the caps that were set in this motion. The first cap is at 50 percent of eligible personal election expenses, and the next cap is the maximum rebate of $3,000. I think that these kind of expense returns are really important to an effective participatory democracy. It levels the playing field for all candidates. What the motion contemplates is not the methodology around how exactly the rebates will be calculated, which I think is important. Really, what this motion speaks to is establishing a rebate and setting out some hard caps for that rebate.

However we want to figure that out, that is fine. I think a 50 percent cap is sufficient, and it levels the playing field across the board. I think $3,000 is probably too low to really impact the state of play in the seven Yellowknife ridings. Typically, incumbents can muster much more financial resources to support their re-election, and furthermore, candidates who can muster the range of finances you need to run a campaign with full advertising, with full election signs, that can run you anywhere from $15,000 to $20,000. That is to be competitive and in particular with incumbents.

I think having a rebate in place allows potential candidates and particular challengers to handle a lot of their upfront costs, knowing that they will get a return on that at the end of the day. I think that is really important because right now, a lot of fund raising happens after the writ is dropped. It is kind of "Let's close the gap." This just takes the pressure off and allows candidates to do what they really need to: focus on running and focus on reaching out to voters and on honing their ideas to be more effective.

I support the motion in principle. I just think it is too restrictive and doesn't represent the maximum benefit that could really be put out there. I think if we enrich this rebate, it is going to have better results and it is going to maximize the impact, in particular for women candidates and for all candidates in general and provide much needed levelling of the playing field for challengers to successfully mount campaigns against incumbents. Rather just speak to my concerns of the initial motions and vote for it, because I do support the motion, I wanted to take the step to bring forward an amendment to represent what I think will be an improvement to what the committee is asking for. I appreciate the work that has gone into it. I appreciate the calculations. I just have a difference of opinion and would like to resolve it by putting this question to the committee. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion to amend. Minister Cochrane.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will not be supporting the amendment to the motion. I had spoken earlier to the committee about the amount of work that the committee put in, the amount of time, the amount of public engagement that we had, the colleagues that we worked with. I felt, in my opinion, that the committee worked very diligently. We didn't always agree on everything, but we came to a consensus, and we came forward with opinions. We took the time to actually review each recommendation and have the hard discussions and do the research on them.

I find this a little bit disrespectful, Mr. Chair, in honesty, that this was brought onto the floor when a special committee has been working for months on this, and it was never brought to the committee's attention and never had a chance to review this.

Out of respect for the special committee on women, I, again, state that I will stand by the committee that did the work, the staff, the chair, and all the committee members, and I will not be supporting an amendment that comes at the last minute on the floor. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion to amend. Mr. Nakimayak.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Earlier on, we were talking about how appreciative we were of the committee. The committee did a lot of hard work, and I am looking at this and the email that we got earlier today. I was thinking about it all day, thinking, "Well, maybe it's a good thing," but at the same time, this wasn't a recommendation from the committee. It really does undermine the work, and Mr. Chair, when you look at the big picture from a 30,000-foot view, it looks sort of like a greedy motion. This is elections for public office, and we are not here to make amendments for ourselves personally or switch it to something that might look like a party.

I have a really hard time actually looking at this, Mr. Chair. We are public servants. We are here to work for people. We are not here for our own personal benefits, and I think that this kind of sits on the wall of that. I am almost thinking that maybe I would like to request a recorded vote when it comes to this, to show that this is the work that we are here to do. We are here to report and hopefully fulfill moving forward.

Mr. Chair, I will be requesting a recorded vote on this. This does not look good on committee's part. It really doesn't. I have a hard time supporting this. Out of all these reports, this had respect up until now, and I want to keep it respectful. For committee's sake, for all of the hard work that people did and all of the input, I will not support this motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To the motion to amend. Ms. Green.

Thank you. To the motion to amend. Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. To be honest, I appreciate what some are sharing as it relates to their concerns, but frankly, this report just came to us here today. We are moving motions on it today. I think that any Member has a right to move an amendment to a motion. That is part of our procedural process. By no means do I see the presenter of the motion trying to, in my view, undercut or undermine the committee's efforts.

I appreciate that, in fact, the mover is trying to make the motion better and allow for the cap to be a one-stage cap rather than a two-stage cap, but I have heard what was in the report. I have heard from the Member from Yellowknife Centre. I tend to agree that, if you look outside the City of Yellowknife and look into the other districts, if you go and look at Elections NWT's financial reports and see the budgets of others who have paid for elections in other jurisdictions, they tend to have a much lower budget than those who are in Yellowknife.

Those who are in Yellowknife probably are averaging somewhere between $10,000 and $20,000. There is a good chance that you have good resources to help you fund that to begin with, and $3,000 would still be a very welcomed rebate. Outside of Yellowknife, there is a good chance that $3,000 would, in fact, end up being about 50 percent. In some instances, it might end up being 100 percent of your campaign expenses.

I think that the motion was originally presented is well-meaning enough and would be welcomed. For that reason, I won't be supporting the amendment to the motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the amendment to the motion. Minister Sebert.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will not be supporting the amendment. I think that the initial motion, which was arrived at after a good deal of discussion, is appropriate to our situation. I think that it is a good first step, again, arrived at after a great deal of discussion.

As has been mentioned by Ms. Green, there are some concerns that, should the amended motion pass, it could incentivize candidates to spend the maximum amount and could favour candidates with the financial means to spend the most funds.

I think that we have taken the right step here. I think that the amendment is a bridge too far, so I will not be supporting the amendment. Thank you.

Thank you. To the motion to amend. Minister Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I saw the report for the first time today, and I was very happy to be sitting in the gallery listening to the Members as they read it in. I think, as the Members read in the report, that I got a sense of what they were trying to accomplish through the recommendations, and I support the recommendations that the committee had put forward.

I saw earlier today that there was going to be a motion to amend. I wanted to maintain an open mind as that motion came forward. It is before us now. I have been listening to the Members talk. Frankly, I listened closely to the Member's rationale as to why the motion to amend was necessary, but I feel that the honourable Member for YK Centre's rationale for why it shouldn't be supported was solid, on point, made sense, and I agree with what the Member suggested it was saying.

As a result, I will not be supporting the motion to amend, but I will be happy to support the motion as it was originally written and intended. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To the motion to amend. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. This concept of election rebates was brought to the attention of the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures in the context of the report from the Chief Electoral Officer in the last election. There was a presentation made by an individual who suggested that this was something that should be done here in the Northwest Territories. Committee, at that point, thought that it was not something that could be pursued easily, that it was a big change to our electoral system and something more in keeping with, perhaps, the way things are done in southern jurisdictions.

I did have a chance to sit in on the committee meeting where the draft report was discussed, and I was certainly persuaded that one of the biggest barriers for women getting into politics is the cost of running a campaign. I think that this may not be the best way to address the issue, but it's certainly, I think, a viable option and one that I certainly support.

I don't support the amendment that's been brought forward by the honourable Member for Kam Lake. I want to thank him, though, for bringing it forward because I think it's got some debate discussion. I don't agree with some of the comments that have been made about the motives behind this and so on, but I do believe it's an honest effort to make sure there's an informed discussion and debate around this issue. The research that I've seen prepared on this would indicate that, if there was no cap, this would tend to benefit, at least in the last two elections, candidates largely from Yellowknife. I don't think that that really accomplishes where the committee wants to go, and I don't think it really addresses the barrier by having no cap whatsoever. I will vote against the amendment, but I will support the motion when we get to vote on it. Thanks Mr. Chair.

To the motion to amend. I will allow the mover of the motion to close debate. Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Given that this is the first opportunity to speak to this report, this is the first opportunity to consider the amendments and, hearing the debate now, I seek unanimous consent to withdraw the motion.