Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I am here to present Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 1, 2022-2023. This supplementary estimates document proposes a total increase of $83.6 million, comprised of the following items:

·$64.7 million for infrastructure expenditures funding for projects that were not completed in 2021-2022. This amount is fully offset by lapses in appropriations in 2021-2022;

• $9.9 million to support priority health information systems. This amount is fully offset by revenues received from the federal government and other funding partners;
• $5.3 million to support the Redknife River Bridge replacement project;
  • $2.3 million to support increased costs related to the Hay River Fish Processing Plant; and.
• $1.3 million to support the acquisition and setup of a new child and family services program space in Fort Smith and Fort Providence. This funding is offset by a reduction in operations expenditures.

That concludes my opening remarks, Madam Chair. I would be happy to answer any questions Members may have.

Thank you, Minister. I'll now open the floor to general comments. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I heard the Minister of Finance say that quite a bit of the carryover was offset by the total amount lapsed. Can I just get how much money this sup is lapsing? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister responsible for Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, it should be $64,740,000 I believe, Madam Chair. Let me just confirm that -- or actually, I'll just ask the deputy minister if he has the page open in front of him.

Thank you. Deputy minister MacKay.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay, I have a different number of what the total lapsed is. And so perhaps I can just get someone to help me understand why you can come to different numbers of what the lapsed funding is and perhaps a bit of an explanation of carryover funding. Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We have the right page out now but let me, if I may, I'll ask Mr. Courtoreille to answer it, since he has that page.

Thank you. Mr. Courtoreille.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. So I'm just going to say $125 million. About $125 million in lapsed funding which, my understanding, carryovers mean, you know, if something got delayed and we just have put it into the next -- another fiscal year, a future fiscal year, but we're still planning this spending whereas a lapse means it's no longer approved by the Cabinet or the legislature and so it may never come back, or it would have to rego through the process.

One of the problems I have is that when you look at what's actually tabled, it's not really clear and you're not really able to figure out when something's lapsing because if it's lapsing, you're not reasking the legislature. It just kind of disappears. So it's not clear by the tabled documents to figure out what exactly is lapsing. So I was hoping the Minister could give us a bit of a rundown of what makes up that $125 million that we are no longer spending on capital. Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So if I'm understanding correctly, just the idea of trying to show the lapsing rather than showing only the carryovers and in a different manner, or. I'm not entirely sure, Madam Chair, I apologize as to how to solve this problem for the Member.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess I'm just hoping the Minister can tell me what is lapsing.

I note as we go through department by department, lapsed money doesn't really show up so I can't ask what's lapsing there individually. You know, it kind of just disappears. If we could have a breakdown of what's lapsing, thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, may I direct that to Mr. Courtoreille, please.

Thank you. Mr. Courtoreille.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. This was one of my continued frustrations with how we do this, is all of the briefing materials we are provided are not public so I actually am not allowed to refer to them or speak to them. Would we be able to make that table, which shows the difference of carryover versus cash flow, public? Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, let me take that one away. I will say we have changed the way we report on materials and information over the last few years, and I will go and have some conversations about what is here, what reasons there may be for and against, and get back to the House with that information.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. You know, I struggle how to even ask questions when this happens.

So the table that we are not supposed to refer to but was referred to previously, it shows the department, it shows what they previously got and it shows the free balance, and then you can tell what's lapsed. But by department, it doesn't tell you any projects. It just tells you the department. So you have no idea, and there's no ability to know the project that is actually being lapsed. I guess would it be possible to get a public list of what actual projects are not being completed by the GNWT anymore? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, that information certainly is available, and I expect -- yes, I would think that we should be able to find a way to put that information forward, Madam Chair. Yes, thank you.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. And I guess one of the prime examples is that in the publicly-tabled documents, there's nothing for the Municipal and Community Affairs, but I believe that the entirety of the community infrastructure budget for Municipal and Community Affairs is being lapsed. And I really don't believe we didn't give them their money. So if someone can illustrate any of what's going on with MACA as lapsing. Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

I'll direct that to the deputy secretary, please.

Mr. Courtoreille.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, I'm going to ask no further questions because I feel I'm unable to ask any questions without specifically looking at a confidential document. And I have said this many times in how we do our budgeting that often we pass budgets where we can't say what we want, where we have no idea that there's no public figure provided for the cost of projects. So I also note that the clock wasn't started when I actually spoke so I think I well used up my time. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.

Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. And I might have blown the whistle on my colleague beside me in terms of the time but, yes, I want to pick up where he's left off.

You know, I find it really difficult that we're trying to do a reconciliation of 2021 capital budget publicly when we've got confidential information. That's what we're trying to do here. And it's not working very well.

So I think I heard somebody say that there's a free balance of about $222 million, if I got it right, or $200 million. Basically the money that wasn't spent on the capital budget from 2021, if I got it right.

So what percentage of the capital budget wasn't spent? Is it, like, roughly 40 percent? 50 percent? 60 percent? Roughly what amount of the budget wasn't spent? Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, we do have the percentage here. I am --

We don't have 2022-2023 yet. In 2021-2022, at this point, Madam Chair, we're looking at about 49 percent, just over. 49.6.

Member for Frame Lake.

Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. That's a problem. We can't spend 50 percent of the capital budget that's approved by the Assembly? Look, that's why I voted against the last capital budget because I didn't believe we could actually get the money out the door. And I've been proven right. And, you know, I don't blame anybody in this room, but -- and there's -- but I've asked now for tracking of those reasons for at least five or six years. Is the department actually tracking these reasons any better? Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. Without breaching confidentiality, I want to compliment the Minister and her staff for their improved tracking of the reason why money's not getting out the door. Unfortunately, I can't speak to it. I can't share it with the public. But I think it's improved, and that's a good thing. So I want to compliment them for doing that but I want to find a way to share that information publicly, because I want to give them more compliments but I can't.

So in any event, we're not doing a good job at reconciling the capital spending and how it figures into supplementary appropriations on the capital side, and that's a real problem.

So of the money that is -- some of it's being carried over, $64 million I guess is what this sup is for. So the remaining amount, 126, if I got it right, it's being lapsed, what happens to it? Does it just go back into the consolidated revenue fund? Are any of those projects going to come back in another sup or in the capital estimates for 2023-2024? What happens to that money? Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I mean, there's different -- and Madam Chair, let me just address the confidentiality issue quickly if I might. I don't have a clock in front of me, but I'll try and be succinct.

Look, I do think we can do a different way of presenting this information. This wasn't raised to me in advance, and that's fine. But I do think there's ways of doing it. There's concerns around the long-term plan and concerns around sharing the budgets on the long term. Some of these projects are multiyear projects so sharing what's lapsing inevitably winds up sharing what some of the budgets are. So that said, I do think there's ways we can get this information out. So we'll take that away.

Now, as for what happens to the funds in one year, again, may depend on the nature of a project. The long-term project may already have funds approved going forward, and the project can then continue. If it's not continuing then, yes, the money would just lapse back in to being in the general coffers of the government. Or the consolidated revenue fund. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Frame Lake.

Yes, thanks, Madam Chair. So I guess I want to start to draw some conclusions here to this because I think it means at least a couple of things to me.

Number 1, we need to review the fiscal responsibility policy about how much and when we can spend money on capital and where it comes from and so on. And when we can't spend 50 percent of a capital budget, the fiscal responsibility policy itself I think needs to be reviewed. And I think we may have a commitment from the Minister to do that. But maybe I'll stop there and I'll ask the Minister whether that's something that's going to happen. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, Madam Chair, there already is a commitment out there to review the fiscal responsibility policy. Thank you.

Thank you. Member Frame Lake.

Okay, thanks, Madam Chair. And thanks to the Minister for that.

The second conclusion I draw from this is that we're spending, or attempting to spend, or budgeting too much on capital. And what means is that we have less money for programs and services because it's all -- too much, in my opinion, is going into capital, and then it gets carried over and over and over and over, over a series of years in some cases, maybe it never gets spent. But what it does is eats up some of the money in the operating surplus which means that we are spending less than we could, and perhaps even should, on programs and services, particularly housing, healthcare, education, people's basic human needs. That's what's resulting here, Madam Chair, in my view. I'd like to hear what the Minister has to say. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, so I would say that the Member is correct insofar as by having a large capital plan, we wind up that we are not going to be able to completely spend, if you will, and it may be difficult to know in advance which project is or is not going to go ahead. So you know, there's inevitably going to be some amount that does not get spent, and that's never going to be a perfect projection.

By having the large capital, we are not necessarily impacted immediately or taking away from operations. The operations budget is still, you know, existing and being developed on its own based on those needs department by department.

However, by having a capital plan that is too large in the sense that we know we will not achieve all of it, we are creating a situation where -- I don't know if you can recall seeing the borrowing limit and seeing the narrowing gap in between them. If the capital budget wasn't as large, well then we wouldn't be running up as close to that projected line of hitting the borrowing limit because we would have more room. There would not be the need to project the higher level of debt because we simply wouldn't have to take on the higher level of debt because we wouldn't have as much on the capital plan. So it does impact our overall fiscal situation and the overall fiscal picture by suggesting that we're running up against the borrowing limit when in fact if we're not, if we're not going to need to borrow because we're not going to need to spend all that money in the capitol plan, well then our fiscal situation doesn't run up against the borrowing limit quite so quickly. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. Yes, I want to thank the Minister for reminding me of a third point. She just made it for me, that with our overspending, or at least overbudgeting, I'll put it that way, on capital side that we are having to increase the debt limit several times even during my lowly six years here. But once again, the conclusions I draw from this are number 1, that, you know, we are getting closer that debt limit because of overspending on capital; number 2, we have to review the fiscal responsibility policy; and number 3, we're taking money away from basic human needs like education, healthcare, and housing, by spending too much on -- or budgeting too much on capital projects that we can't get the money out the door.

So that's the conclusions I draw, and that's what, Madam Chair, where I'm going to vote against the supplementary appropriation because it -- although there is some money lapsed and it's not going to come back, it still perpetuates the overspending on capital by this government ad does not meet people's basic human needs. And that's why I'll vote against this. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. Are there any further general comments before we get into the detailed? Member for Thebacha.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be voting for this appropriation because the lack of infrastructure in communities and regional centres compared to the capital, for example, is lacking. And this appropriation addresses some of those needs that are needed in the communities and regional centres, as well as the capital. And I don't believe that when you build on capital projects within the territories that we're taking away from education and basic human needs. On the contrary, okay.

I think that each and every one of us in our capacity as leaders cannot draw that conclusion. And I don't agree with my colleague with some of those comments. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. Are there any further general comments? Seeing no further general comments, we will review the supplementary estimates by department and activity. Does committee agree to proceed with detailed in the tabled documents?

Committee, we will begin on page 6.

Department of Education, Culture and Employment, operation expenditures, junior kindergarten to grade 12 school services, not previously authorized, $4,893,000. Does committee agree? Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I just confirm that Sissons is still on track and ready to be opened for the next school season? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

Yes, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Any further questions? Member for Yellowknife North, any further questions? No, okay.

Department of Education, Culture and Employment, operations expenditures, junior kindergarten to grade 12 school services, not previously authorized, $4,893,000. Does committee agree?

Thank you. Department of Education, Culture and Employment, operations expenditures, total department not previously authorized, $4,893,000. Does committee agree?

Committee, please turn to page 7 of the tabled document.

Department of Infrastructure, operations expenditures, asset management, not previously authorized, $552,000. Does committee agree? Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. In my never-ending attempt to understand accounting language, this $552,000 has an offsetting amount which was lapsed in the previous fiscal. Does that therefore make this a carryover but just essentially a carryover that doesn't cost us any money because we lapsed it last fiscal; am I at all on the right page? Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Madam Chair, take that to the deputy secretary, please.

Thank you. Mr. Courtoreille.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay, so I do have questions, then.

So we're carrying over about $550,000 of the $1.5 million, meaning the Department of Infrastructure lapsed about a million dollars of deferred maintenance. And I guess my understanding of this happens is because they don't have the contracts in place so they can't say we're absolutely have either a contractual commitment or significant progress under the Financial Administration Manual is why it lapses. But I guess can we get a bit of an explanation of why that happened?

Because I know that the GNWT's deferred maintenance backlog is massive. You know, there's different calculations based on needs but it's fair to say it's in the hundreds of millions of dollars. So how on earth are we not spending a million of it? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, to the deputy secretary, please.

Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Courtoreille.

Thank you. Department of Infrastructure, operations expenditures, asset management, not previously authorized, $552,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Infrastructure, operations expenditures, total department, not previously authorized, $552,000. Does committee agree?

Committee, can you please turn to page 8 now of the tabled document. Legislative Assembly, capital investment expenditures, Office of the Clerk, not previously authorized, $175,000. Does committee agree?

Thank you. Legislative Assembly, capital investment expenditures, total department, not previously authorized, $175,000. Does committee agree?

Thank you. Please turn now to page 9.

Department of Education, Culture and Employment, capital investment expenditures, cultural, heritage and language, not previously authorized, $75,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Education, Culture and Employment, capital investment expenditures, junior kindergarten to grade 12 school services, not previously authorized, $6,549,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Education, Culture and Employment, capital investment expenditures, total department, not previously authorized, $6,624,000. Does committee agree?

Thank you. Please now turn to page 10 of the tabled document.

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, capital investment expenditures, corporate management, not previously authorized, $581,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, capital investment expenditures, environment protection and waste management, not previously authorized, $581,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, capital investment expenditures, forest management, not previously authorized, $767,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, capital investment expenditures, wildlife and fish, not previously authorized, $1,203,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, capital expenditure -- Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, I guess I still am struggling to read these and understand. Can I get an update?

There's $119,000 for a walk-in freezer in Yellowknife. This was actually -- got a lot more attention than it should have, perhaps. It got a lot of attention, let's just say, when it was passed because it's used to store seized caribou.

Can I just clarify whether this $119,000 that I'm seeing here means it is lapsed and no longer going forward or that there was just a delay in the project? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. It's just delayed in some fashion and that's why it's being carried over for completion. Thank you.

Thank you. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, capital investment expenditures, wildlife and fish, not previously authorized, $1,203,000. Does committee agree?

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, capital investment expenditures, total department, not previously authorized, $3,132,000. Does committee agree?

Please turn now to page 11.

Department of Finance, capital investment expenditures, information system shared services, not previously authorized, $4,389,000. Does committee agree? Member for Yellowknife North.