Member for Nunakput.

Thank you. Minister.

Madam Chair, if I could turn to to Kelly Bluck, please.

Thank you for that. Are there any further general comments to Bill 92? Member for Frame Lake.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. First off, I want to thank the Minister for her kind words about me earlier, but she doesn't get off the hook completely.

You know, I do and will vote in favour of this bill. And I think it's -- the Minister's kept true to her word. After hearing what happened with the last changes to the carbon tax, the Minister said she was going to come back and try to fix the revenue sharing arrangement with community governments. That's in this bill. She even stretched it to include annual reporting. Thanks to the work of the standing committee, there's now some detail to that annual reporting. There's still one missing piece, that I'm going to get to at some point, about the need for a deadline for the annual reporting. But there's still some unfinished pieces of business with regard to the carbon tax, okay. I get to scratch maybe a couple of things off my list, but there's still unfinished business. I don't want to review the whole debate, Madam Chair, but I'm just going to highlight some of them because I think it's important to continue to raise these issues.

The first one is the unfair treatment of different kinds of businesses. The large emitters are getting 72 percent of their carbon tax back. That's not fair because small businesses, NGOs get nothing. That's just patently unfair. And the large emitters actually were consulted on this, development of the carbon tax, nobody else was. That's privileged access, and our government has to stop that. Everybody should have equal access and an equal say when policies, legislation, comes forward and the opportunity to have input. So we got to make this fairer and find ways to help smaller businesses, NGOs.

One other concern is the lack of transparency. This is going to be partially addressed by annual reporting thanks to the standing committee and the Minister. But, in my view, this should actually be set up as a revolving fund so there's completely separate accounting and greater transparency around this fund. And I know my friends in the Department of Finance really do not like targeted revenues, but if there was ever a case for targeted revenues, this is it.

Carbon tax should be used by our government to help mitigate the impacts of it, but it should also be used to help the environment and stop greenhouse gas emissions. Right now the money goes into the consolidated revenue fund, not good. Just not much accountability there. Yukon sets theirs up as a revolving fund and so should we. And those monies can only be used for greenhouse gas emission reductions and trying to mitigate the impacts of carbon tax as well. And I think we need and should be doing the same thing.

The last thing, Madam Chair, is methane. Methane should be a regulated greenhouse gas emission, and it is in many other jurisdictions. Our government lobbied for its removal. I just don't get it. Methane is 80 times more damaging to the environment than carbon dioxide. It's one of the greenhouse gases that we could actually make some significant progress towards our overall target if we actually worked on methane alone. And, really, there's only one operation where this happens, and that's Norman Wells. So I don't understand why Norman Wells was given a pass on this. There's flaring. There's fugitive emissions in the industry. They have voluntarily agreed to start to work towards reducing these. And our government should have included methane as one of the gases that is regulated under the -- and taxed, and we should not have given a pass to Imperial Oil at Norman Wells. And I really regret that, Madam Chair. And that's not good public policy, quite frankly, so. So anyways, I will support this bill. We're making progress. We're now sharing some of the revenues with community governments. We're going to have annual reporting. But I do have one question for the Minister. Can the Minister tell me why there's no report deadline in the bill? Thanks, Madam Chair

Thank you, Member. Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, the language around what the deadline and the reporting would be was crafted jointly. I'm not sure if perhaps legislative counsel wants to speak more to that.

Thank you. Ms. Jeffrey.

Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. I think we're just getting ahead a bit of ourselves on this one. So I don't think the bill actually contains a deadline for annual reporting other than it has to happen. And that's good. When we get to the clause-by-clause review, I'll be making a specific motion that I understand the Minister's prepared to support, and Cabinet's prepared to support, just to have a deadline for that reporting. But I'll move that at the appropriate time in the clause-by-clause review. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Committee, can we proceed to a clause-by-clause review of the bill?

Committee, we will defer the bill number and title until after consideration of the clauses. Please turn to page 1 of the bill.

Clause 1, does committee agree?

Clause 2, does committee agree?

Clause 3, does committee agree?

Clause 4. Member for Frame Lake.

Mahsi, Madam Chair. I spoke a little earlier about I think the bill. It's good that there's now annual reporting -- well, there was annual reporting. Now it's a little more detailed. But the missing piece here, I think is an actual deadline by which the annual report would have to be filed. And, you know, I have no doubt that the department and the staff are going to do that, but having a deadline sometimes makes sure it actually gets done. And I've been in this -- in my eight years, there's been at least a couple of instances where there was a requirement for annual reporting and the annual reports weren't actually done. The Environmental Rights Act being one and the Superintendent for Insurance, there was a bunch of years that annual reports were never done. So having a deadline just, I think, helps people focus, get the work done by a certain date, and I have picked a date for this motion that I am going to move, and it fits within the broad scope of the three reports that have already been voluntarily done by the department. So, Madam Chair, I'd like to proceed with a motion to amend if I could.

Thank you. Member for Frame Lake, go ahead.