Thank you, Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Great Slave.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also rise to recognize the members of NAPEG that have joined us here today for the first reading of the bill. Yes, first reading of the bill - make sure I have that right.

One of the really interesting things about this group -- I've already acknowledged Ed so I'm not going to speak further about him -- is that all three of the women sitting up there are my constituents. I am also a former councillor for NAPEG. So it's very exciting for me to have them all here and to have such amazing strong scientifically-minded women in my riding. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member for Great Slave. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Member for Nahendeh. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. First reading of bills. Minister responsible for Infrastructure.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the House Bill 93, Practice of Engineering, Geoscience and Applied Science Technology Act, to be read for the first time. Quyananni, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Bill 93 has had first reading. First reading of bills. Minister responsible for Justice.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the House Bill 94, Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment Act, 2023, to be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Bill 94 has had first reading. First reading of bills. Second reading of bills. Minister responsible for Finance.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Nahendeh, that Bill 92, An Act to Amend the Petroleum Products and Carbon Tax Act, No. 3, be read for the second time.

This bill amends the Petroleum Products and Carbon Tax Act to establish an unconditional carbon tax revenue sharing grant payable to community governments and to establish an annual report with respect to the collection and administration of carbon tax under the act. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. The motion is in order. To the principle of the bill. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I rise to speak to the principle and merit of this bill.

I want to sincerely thank the Minister for bringing forward the bill that addresses some of the concerns raised during the review and debate on Bill 60. Specifically, Bill 92 requires unconditional carbon tax revenue sharing grants to communities with a formula to be determined by the Minister. This is a much better solution than dealing with community government payments through the main estimates. I still -- there are still some issues around when the payments will be made and what other deductions may be made to gross carbon tax revenues. I am confident that these issues can be resolved when in review of the bill.

The other issues, though -- the other issue covered in the bill, Mr. Speaker, is mandatory annual reporting, which is a good move but there are no details on what is to be reported and when. Reports are to be on the collection and administration of the carbon tax but there's no specific details required, such as financial information, money in or money out, or the cost of administration, predictions on greenhouse gas emissions, and whether the carbon tax is fulfilling its purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions as confirmed in this House on March 23 by the Finance Minister.

There's also no deadline for annual report that's set out in the bill. Of note, the three carbon tax reports issued so far have taken seven, nine, and seven months from fiscal year end to be made public. Bill 91, in contrast, does provide a list of financial items to be reported annually, greenhouse gas predictions and a discussion on the effectiveness of the carbon tax in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. There's also a six-month period for an annual report to be prepared and made public in Bill 91 providing some clarity over when it will be available. A draft of Bill 91, which only focuses on carbon tax reporting, was provided to Cabinet with a request for feedback but no response was received. It will now be up to the Standing Committee on Government Operations to sort it out, but I will come prepared with ideas.

Lastly, I want to comment on the narrow scope of this bill. Without diving too deeply into the tragedy and trauma of Bill 60 and the debate we had in this House in March, Bill 92 does not resolve the need for separate accounting as well of the carbon tax from the consolidated revenue fund. There's also the outstanding issue of fair treatment for all businesses and NGOs as only the large emitters, the diamond mines, will get an effective 72 percent rebate. There's also issues, Mr. Speaker, around the exclusion of methane emissions from the carbon tax, which I believe should also be revisited. And there should be mandatory public engagement before regulations are made or significantly changed.

Mr. Speaker, those are my remarks on Bill 92, and I look forward to working with people in this House to get this resolved. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. The motion is in order. To the principle of the bill.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Any abstentions? Bill 92 has had second reading and is referred to the committee.

---Carried

Second reading of bills. Consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters. Bill 23, 29, and 72, Committee Report 52-19(2), Minister's Statement 264-19(2), Tabled Document 681-19(2), Tabled Document 940-19, Tabled Document 941-19(2), with Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes in the chair.

I now call Committee of the Whole to order. What is the wish of committee? Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. Committee wishes to consider Bill 72 and Tabled Document 940-19(2) and Tabled Document 941-19(2). Mahsi, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Does committee agree?

Thank you, committee. We'll take a short recess and resume with the first item.

---SHORT RECESS

Committee, we've agreed to consider Bill 72, Opioid Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act. I will ask the Minister of Justice to introduce the bill.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am here today to present Bill 72, Opioid Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act.

The purpose of Bill 72 is to permit the Government of the Northwest Territories to file a lawsuit to recover from manufacturers and distributors of opioid drugs, the past and future health care costs incurred on behalf of Northwest Territories' residents for opioid-related illnesses. The opioid crisis has incurred substantial costs to federal, provincial, and territorial governments who have spent increasing amounts on health care to address the fallout of opioid over-prescription.

British Columbia has enacted its own opioid cost recovery legislation and is in active class action litigation before the Supreme Court of British Columbia. This action could include all federal, provincial, and territorial governments as potential class members in this lawsuit and seeks to recover the opioid-related health care costs of the potential class members.

Currently, the GNWT's ability to independently recover opioid damages is in question as the applicable limitation period has expired under the Limitation of Actions Act. As our legislation stands, the GNWT may be unable to recover health care costs under British Columbia's opioid action. The proposed legislation would not only remove the existing limitation period barrier to such a claim but also improve the likelihood of the opioid action's success by establishing a common issue across all jurisdictions with that legislation. This would simplify the advancement of the opioid action.

The proposed new act will:

• Provide a statutory basis to sue manufacturers and distributors of opioid drugs directly for opioid-related wrongs;
• Provide the ability to sue opioid producers and distributors on an aggregate basis without having to identify particular insured persons who suffered harm;
• Provide simplified formula to determine the individual share of liability for each opioid producer and/or manufacturer named in a lawsuit;
• Provide the ability to base claims of harm on statistical and sociological data; and,
• Extend limitation periods applicable to actions based on opioid-related harm.

Approximately eight other jurisdictions have enacted their own versions of this legislation, and the wording of the proposed new act is virtually identical to the existing legislation in other jurisdictions.

This concludes my opening remarks, and I would be happy to answer questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister. Would you like to bring witnesses into the Chamber?

Yes, I would.