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.