Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, as we all know, the committee of Regular Members brought forward a letter at the start of this session explaining our concerns about the health care crisis and the housing crisis, stating that we need to see significant steps to improve both before we can support the capital budget.

So on health care, we are still in a crisis, but I also understand that the path forward requires more operational changes than capital-related changes. There are steps being taken such as the establishment of the health care system sustainability unit which we certainly need to continue to monitor closely to ensure we actually gain some momentum in addressing these urgent problems.

Where I still do not see a path forward is with regard to the housing crisis. Currently, we seem to be stuck in an outdated way of thinking about what our vision is for public housing in the NWT. As I mentioned in my Member's statement earlier today, the philosophy certainly of the federal government for decades has been that the government just needs to get out of public housing, just kind of ease our way out, and then the market will solve all of our housing problems. But this completely ignores the realities in small nonmarket communities.

All the evidence we have of where our communities' economies are at and incomes in these small nonmarket communities, all this evidence leads us to the conclusion that a significant portion of our population will continue to depend on public housing to meet their basic shelter needs. And so our public housing stock needs to be larger than it currently is to allow our population to meet their basic shelter needs.

As we know, basic shelter is the most foundational aspect of any of the priorities we've set in this Assembly. Without basic shelter, people cannot pursue their education, they cannot stay healthy, they cannot keep a job, and we cannot grow our economy.

I feel like we've been wishing away the need for more public housing. Just hoping or waiting until something or someone else takes care of it, that maybe the Indigenous governments will build enough private housing in each community that those who currently reside in public housing will be able to move out, and that'll free up enough public housing for all the people who need it, even though there's 900 people who are on the waiting list who apparently need it. We just have no evidence to believe that that is actually possible or going to happen. And in fact, all of our evidence leads us to a different conclusion, which is we need more public housing stock. I mean, we've been failing to allocate enough money so far even to take care of all of our existing assets in terms of our public housing stock let alone allocating money to expand our public housing stock. And we continually look to the federal government for a hail Mary. If we look to our neighboring territory, if we look at the Nunavut 3000 strategy, we see that it is, indeed, possible for a territory to increase its public housing stock and to devote its own territorial money, resources, to actually doing that, to making it happen.

But why is this important for my riding, for YK North? First, I mean, somewhere between one-third to a half of the public housing waiting list is in Yellowknife, so it's not only demand in small nonmarket communities, but rising homelessness across the territory also has huge impacts on my riding, and all of Yellowknife, and I hear about that every day from constituents. Most of the people who have ended up homeless on the streets of Yellowknife are not originally from here. The latest survey from the review of Street Outreach found that 90 percent of the people who were using the Street Outreach services who are on the streets of Yellowknife are not from Yellowknife. They've ended up here. Why?

A lot of that reason is because of lack of adequate housing in their home communities. So perhaps more than any other issue housing, and specifically public housing, links all communities in this territory with the ripple effects of chronic underinvestment and it costs all communities, including Yellowknife.

So for these reasons, I feel I have no choice today but to vote against the capital budget. And I don't take that vote lightly. I understand that the ideal way to achieve these kinds of policy changes I'm talking about is not to vote against the capital budget, but the status quo way of doing things doesn't seem to be accomplishing those policy changes either.

I want to be clear that I have full confidence in the finance Minister. I have full confidence in the Premier and in Members of Cabinet. I still have a lot to learn about the best ways to create effective change as a Regular MLA. But I also think there needs to be a lot of adjustments to our status quo way of doing things, way of working in this building, for us to successfully achieve our priorities. I don't want to suggest that we just open the flood gates to endless spending, and I know many people fear that if we start spending more on public housing, it will be a black hole of spending that will never be enough.

I am by nature, I would say, a fiscal conservative. My instinct is always to help us reign in spending, to be more efficient, to find savings. I would like to have more of a role in that. I do think we need to shift where we spend. I would like to see more opportunities for Regular MLAs to be part of those tough conversations about tradeoffs, priorities, shifting spending, to be part of those conversations much earlier on to talk about the kinds of things we would like to shift spending away from so that we can responsibly increase our funding for housing, and specifically public housing. So I'll leave it there for now, Mr. Chair, but I wanted to explain the way I plan to vote on this budget. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from the Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll make my presentation short and to the point and move on. Yes, there's many challenges that we inherited as the 20th Assembly, carryovers, dead carryovers, misled projects, cost increases. That is for the reason why we set the -- or the Minister of Finance gave a fiscal sustainability strategy, a strategy to recognize that and balance the books. And when I look at the budget, it doesn't really 100 percent accommodate and satisfy everybody. Yes, we try, we negotiate, and we come up with the best capital plan we think is best in balancing our books and servicing the need. The need, I must emphasize, in my region alone, the only remotest area, and the largest one of this territory, and yet the most impoverished one. If I shared my wish list, I'll need more than ten minutes.

Right off the get-go, we were left with no water. That put an emphasis on the impoverished side of the community. You can't create jobs if you don't have your building materials shipped to the site. And the list goes on. And I look at the design negotiated capital plan and what's in it for the Sahtu, and the people that put me in this chair, I think to myself, yes, I support this, but I also look at the future years and try to accommodate the need and a balanced fiscal position. So in short there, Mr. Chair, I will be, yes, supporting this capital plan. Mahsi.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Mackenzie Delta.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In order to be productive in our society today, we have to be healthy. In order to be healthy, we have to have homes. And right now, I don't feel that this government is reaching out to the people of the Northwest Territories saying that we are going to prioritize what you wanted. During our elections, I've heard numerous times, every house I went to, you know, they showed me the condition of their houses. Some people were walking around because they didn't have houses. And that's what they wanted. They have children that's walking with them, they're going to a friend's house, parents. These are just band-aid solutions.

The Indigenous government stated that their main priority was housing. I go back to my community of Fort McPherson and I hear that on a daily basis, that housing is a priority. They should be pouring money into it and when you look at what was proposed, it was an insult.

In order for our students to be productive, they got have a good night's sleep, they have to stay warm, and the education system is failing them. I hear that continuously from staff members that work at the schools, that these students are uneducated. They can't read at the level they're supposed to be reading. You know, I feel sorry for those teachers because they're trying, but yet there's another group of students who's illiterate that's in the grade that's going to come up next year. And the cycle continues until they're pushed through another door, and that door is income support where they're given everything. They're given the opportunity not to work. They're given the opportunity not to go to school to further their education and be productive residents of their communities. And it's sad to see that because, you know, previous governments, this has been going on for years. I've witnessed people going -- that are adults now that have children that are going to school, and they're in the same situation. They're sending their children to school because they know they'll have free time. That's what these staff members are saying. They're just sending their children to school because they know they'll have a good seven hours of not -- you know, being away. But the ones that are suffering is the students themselves. They're not given the opportunity to get a good education. That education system is not working at all.

And the income, I've always stated, you know, continuously income assistance needs a review. We have to give our residents of our communities a chance at life. We have inadequate health care within our smaller communities. We need to look after our elders. I've often heard that from our people in the communities, our leadership, saying that our elders are our greatest resources, that we have to look after them and yet, as a government, we're not looking after them.

We have criminal activities within the housing units that's not being addressed. The residents of each community knows of these people. Before coming into government, I tried to address that as a resource person in the community. I went to the local housing authority. And the answer they gave me was, you know, in order for them to act on this they have to give them 24 hours notice and by the time they give them 24 hours, they deliver their letter saying that they're going to come search their house, they're moved on to another unit. So we need something in there where we can correct this problem because it's the children of our communities that are hurting.

I know of this one gentleman in my community who was homeless for years, and he slept at different homes within the community and now housing gave him a home, and his home is like a homeless shelter because he knows how it feels for others to be homeless. So he opens his one bedroom house to people that don't have a place to go. He knows the feeling. So some of these -- we always talk about homelessness, well, I've stated this, like maybe about 20 years ago you never saw that in our communities because family members, friends, took them in. You never saw anybody walking out on the streets. But now with all these drugs in our communities, people don't want to be bothered because they're scared because these people are -- they may be a danger to their families. And it's difficult to see this.

I can't go back to my community if I support this capital budget here. I can't go back to my community and say that, you know, everything's going to be okay because it's not. The residents of my constituency put me in this position to look after their well-being, and I have to look after their well-being. So my position is that I will not be supporting this budget. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Next on my list I have is the Member from Frame Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just sitting with the words of my colleagues here. And I think that the first thing I want to say is, you know, just an expression of how much I respect and value the positions of my colleagues and the different perspectives that are shared here regardless of whether -- which way you go on this vote in particular or any vote, really. You know, I deeply appreciate, respect, and value our democratic process and the people who put us all here to represent them, and part of that respect is respecting the different voices that are brought to the table. So I appreciate the comments of the previous speakers.

The bottom line for me on this one -- I don't want to repeat too much of what's already been said. Like I said, I appreciate those comments and, you know, we've all got places to get to, families to go home to or call. And, you know, the real sticking point for me on this one, similar to my previous colleagues who kind of spoke to housing, the ultimate sticking point for me was a word, the word notional. The word notional that meant a notional commitment to a plan but wasn't able to fully commit to that not knowing where necessarily the money would come from. And I think the Member for Yellowknife North kind of spoke to being prepared to have the conversation about what we need to do in order to shift our resources towards our priorities as necessary. And as I've been saying through this process, I'm very open to that conversation. Still looking forward to having it. And so I was looking for us, similar to the Member for Yellowknife North, to not be notional about our planning, but to make a plan, commit to it, be willing to fund it with our resources.

Ultimately, when we came together as AOC and drafted the letter that we all ended up, you know, publishing in this House, making public by tabling in this House, I wouldn't have put my name behind that letter if I didn't mean it and I was not prepared to stand by it. I am prepared to stand by it, and I will do so today.

I want to speak briefly to, you know, the conditions of housing in my riding, in Yellowknife, in the communities, in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Chair, before taking on this role, I served for a number of years as -- on the board of directors of the Yellowknife Housing Authority. I got a good idea as to what the housing issues are in our community, my community. In particular, the most impactful moment I had during my time on the authority was when we went on a tour of some of the housing in Yellowknife. Some of the structures were fairly new, were, you know, exciting to look at, and I was happy about what is being brought forward for residents. But some of the places where people are living in in Yellowknife, the conditions are appalling. They're -- I don't know if I can quite find words for it, but the best way I can illustrate what I felt when touring through those buildings was no child raised in a building like this is being set up to succeed, and it stuck with me. I had absolutely no doubt in my mind whatsoever when I put housing at the top of my list when I ran for election that this is an issue that we need to resolve. You know, very few people write you a message or call you up and say this is the exact reason I voted for you but when you put a platform on the table, you have to assume that it had some role in getting you elected. Housing was at the top. And so I feel a strong obligation to keep it at the top until I feel that we're making substantive progress towards it.

And so for me, what I wanted to see was more than a notional commitment, was for this government to really step up, allocate resources to our housing crisis, as we need to, in order to lift people out of the conditions that I just described. It is very important to me, and it remains important to me. For that reason, I join my colleagues who will not be supporting the capital budget. And, you know, I appreciated the comments from the Member from Inuvik Boot Lake. He was kind of mentioning, you know, we're taking a very somewhat operational perspective on the budget through capital budget negotiations but as the Member for Range Lake noted, you know, this is the tool that we have. And so I was prepared to use that tool to put pressure on the government. And I want to be clear, like some previous Members have been clear also, that, you know, I very much appreciate the position -- the very difficult position that the finance Minister's in, I appreciate and respect that perspective. I appreciate the various, you know, concessions and the seriousness with which Cabinet approached the concerns brought forward by Regular Members. I do have confidence that they are taking us seriously. We didn't quite get where I wanted to get to, and that is part of how this system works.

Something that I wanted to -- I always like to kind of come back to this because it's a bit of a passion of mine, but something I did kind of want to note is something that I noted to the clerk the other day during one of our chats that, you know, sometimes things can be really difficult in here. This is not an easy job. It's certainly a job that involves a lot of pressure. It's a job that pits very strong perspectives against one another, between people who I care about, people whose perspectives I respect greatly. But as I said to the clerk, you know, we are having the right conversations here. We're here fighting about the issues that matter to the NWT. We're here fighting about -- fighting is the wrong word, but we're here kind of discussing the major policy issues that this government is facing and the directions that we're going to go with the territory, and that is what is described by practitioners as healthy conflict. It's the right kind of conflict to be having in a building like this. So I want to just kind of highlight that and note that I think that we are having the right conversation, that the conversation we're having right now is the right one. You know, I've landed on the position that I have. I wanted to stand strong in the position that I took, and I will continue to do that. So I think that wraps up my comments on capital budget for today. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'm going to go maybe take a moment here, and I'll swap out with the Member from Sahtu to fill in as chair.

---SHORT RECESS

Members, we will have the next Member from Great Slave. Go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's been a year of hearing my colleagues demonstrate the unbelievable need for basic services in small communities. It's been a year of clean-up after major events. It's been a year of heartache and hurt, and so many of us are still raw bundles of nerves trying to find some peace. I've been told that 15 to 20 years ago working here was a bit of a party. The diamond companies were swinging, the trips to Ottawa were fun, ribbon cutting happened, and it sounds like there were a lot more laughs. And that's no longer the case. Fast forward to now, and the honeymoon of the 20th Assembly is long gone. Urgent emergencies still exist. Climate change is hammering us in different ways year after year. My colleague from the Sahtu has detailed his constituents' need to see resources flow while it's still possible in the winter season for capital projects as they clearly can't get it moving in the summer by barge due to low water levels.

Every day in this building, I hear the frustration of Members that we can't adequately help residents with their most basic needs, most notably in housing and health care. We are scrambling to help, and many days it feels like we're stuck on a leaky boat with a tiny cup to bale out water.

I agree with my colleague from Frame Lake who spoke earlier today to the fact that systems of how we budget, plan, and make good decision in the GNWT need to change and adapt to this new reality we find ourselves in. Members have asked for real change in investments in housing and health care. We set out on that path after setting our priorities just a little over nine months ago. Unfortunately, moving at the speed of government, that's the blink of an eye, and that is also a frustration for anyone who has ever been in government and for those who haven't. To make meaningful systemic change takes time, effort, and likely tears.

I want to speak to notional. Notional is something I hoped that Cabinet would drop from their offer, and they haven't. The reality of funding for housing means it can't be anything but notional. Nunavut 3000 started out as notional, and they worked from there. So I still have high hopes. Those high hopes might end like a led balloon, and that's on Cabinet to pull out.

I have a personal touchstone in writing by the writer Paul Ford that I return to again and again. Quote: There is this set of heavy lenses mounted on a steel base. Each lens is 8 feet across. Looking through them, the world is blurry. Turning these lenses is exhausting. It wears out the muscles, it takes all your energy an inch a day each, and maybe you have three whole revolutions to go on before you end up in focus. It'll take a hundred years to get a clear picture of the world. I'll be dead by then. But in the meantime, some focus is better than none. End quote.

I have heard about focus and visions in conversations with Cabinet. I have faith in both of the Ministers in housing and health care holding those portfolios. They have shared some confidential information with Members that have a bold vision in the near term, and it's not my place to speak to that detail. But I have confidence that those heavy lenses are being turned in earnest. I am happy to say that I have good relationships with these Ministers, and they're doing the best they can as quick as they can with the tools they have while also trying to build new tools at the same time. That's the sticking point, it seems, what is possible today and what can be accomplished quickly. To that, I'd say for real and lasting and crucially meaningful and impactful change, that takes longer than nine months. In this instance, and for the urgency of the issues facing the Sahtu and for what I see as mainly a pared back capital budget, I will be supporting it. Thank you.

Thank you to the Member from Great Slave. We will move on to the next Speaker, the Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I came in as the MLA for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh in the 19th Assembly and re-elected in the 20th Assembly. When I came to this job, I came with good experience. What I brought to the table is -- as a tradesman in the carpentry. I built a lot of homes throughout the North, worked for PCL, Clark Builders. I did my time in the construction industry. I worked in construction management. And before even Nunavut was here, I worked all over the whole Northwest Territories. And I also sat on the national AFN housing board back in the 1990s, late 1990s. And even at that time, right across Canada we're probably about 120,000 homes short. And here in the Northwest Territories, today we're about 10,000 homes short. And back in the early days with the GNWT government, they had a really good program in place with the Government of Canada and CMHC where they built homeownership programs, they had money for emergency repair programs, money for senior citizen home repair programs, home improvement programs was a big one where they retrofitted homes. And these homes now today are aging out about 40,000 homes. The life cycle of a house is about 50 years before you need a complete retrofit. And it's a big issue here in the North in regards to housing.

I brought this up in the 19th Assembly and spoke passionately about it, and here in the 20th Assembly I'm doing the same thing again. But when I ran for MLA for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh, housing was one of my top priorities. And what I heard was, you know, we got to do something about housing. We need homeownership repairs. Just imagine if we -- if the fire marshal comes into our communities and look at our HAP houses today that's been built back in the, you know, late '80s, it would be concerning. So I'm really concerned that if that ever happened, how are we as a government going to deal with that issue with the housing crisis we already are in?

So I put forward ideas because I brought forward issues on housing to the housing Minister back in the 19th Assembly and the 20th Assembly. When we got together as MLAs when we first got elected in the 20th Assembly, we listened to all the leaders up and down the Valley that came to Yellowknife, all the MLAs came forward and brought their issues forward, and we came up with four priorities, and housing is number one. And I'm deeply concerned here in the 20th Assembly that we're not putting a lot of money into the efforts of homeownership, affordable homes. And how are we going to meet the demands about 10,000 homes short we need today? So there is a big concern. And I know that when this government -- when we put in the Premier and the Cabinet Ministers, you know, a lot of housing issues were carried over from the last Assembly.

In the last Assembly, I asked the question about austerity and basically it was said that at the time that this issue will be brought forward to the 20th Assembly. Now we're at $2.29 billion as a government, $1.6 million in the deficit. We're $1.6 billion that comes from grants and contribution from the Government of Canada. And that's probably earmarked for Indian, Metis, and Inuit. And it feels like for me, any time I go to government and ask for help, it's like I become a beggar in my homeland and going to the government to ask for help for our people in our small communities. And it's really tough, especially when we have that kind of money that comes from Ottawa, from the Crown. And that's something that I'm hoping that this government and the 20th Assembly will take a look at. But right now the words been thrown around here is notional that was brought in our caucus meeting. And believe me that when we went into a caucus meeting we had, it wasn't -- it was a tough go around because we all had our own views about housing. We brought forward our issues. We had disagreements. And I do apologize to my colleagues, we -- sometimes we step on each other's toes. But at the outcome at the end is that I think what we want to bring forward what we hear from our people in the community. And, you know, the Cabinet is -- we got a good Premier here. We have a good Cabinet. We just got to figure a way as to how we all could work together. And, you know, at the end of the day, we're all on the same ship here. But somehow I don't want to lose sight of what the vision here of the North is is going to be of the 20th Assembly, is that housing is number one. We have to figure a way going forward that we could look at new ways to deliver housing, homeownership repairs, etcetera.

I put forward an initiative because I already knew that every time I went to go see the Minister, I'd knock on the door, they said they got no money or they got policies that says I can't help you. So I put forward an idea that I wanted to do homeownership inspections in my riding, and I figured what the houses -- what state they're in and figure out what it cost for bringing up that unit to code and do that for all four communities, and then work with the GNWT government because I'm tired of trying to say, okay, well, it's all on you. But no, I got to figure a way how we can work together. And I'm really happy that this Cabinet had approved the monies to put aside to do this work. But I think that it'll go a long way if we continue to build that relationship because at the end of the day is that if a lot of these houses get written off or they burn down or something happens and the fire marshal steps in, shut these units down, we're going to be in big trouble.

So I'm -- I think it's a great idea that we continue to build that relationship. And even if this motion here today is defeated, we have to figure a way that it's going to continue to be in the main estimates so that we don't lose sight in that because, you know, at the end of the day, the people in the small communities throughout the Northwest Territories, really need help, and we were elected to be here for them and trying to look for solutions. So, Mr. Speaker -- I mean, Mr. Chairman, you know, this has been a very sensitive subject for me for a very long time.

As you know, our treaties are there, our treaty rights are recognized in the Canadian Constitution. We have UNDRIP. You know, we have a lot of treaty right issues here that needs to be talked about but I'm hoping maybe through the Council of Leaders we really need to take a look as to how we're going to talk about Constitution reform because sooner or later, all our claims are going to get done, we're going to be in a better position to start looking at self-government and manage some of these affairs that we could look at. And I'm hoping that through the Jim Bourque I'll table probably next session and continue to build on that.

So, Mr. Chairman, at this time I'm in favour of voting against the budget on this one here because it doesn't go far enough. And I'm doing this on behalf of my people. We are in a housing crisis, and the top priority of this government, it's just not meeting it right now. And I'm hoping that we'll continue to work together to make sure that we resolve this issue and look for new ways to provide better homes for the residents of the Northwest Territories. With that, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

Thank you to the Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. We will pause for a minute.

---SHORT RECESS

Thank you. Next on my list I have is the Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I will try not to take the full ten minutes here. Mr. Chair, I wanted to make sure there's some clarity -- I hope there's some clarity around what happens by voting down the capital budget and what message is being, in fact, sent.

Mr. Chair, respectfully, we are saying no to capital projects and to the capital -- when we vote down the capital budget. And contrary to a lot of things often asked about about improving our planning, improving our efficiency, doing better in all of those regards, this does the opposite. We vote down the capital budget, there is no appropriation for capital spending done now. So best case scenario is that we're waiting until February to bring it all back, which means there's no contracting, there's no procurement, no one can plan, can't arrange for supplies to be ready, and certainly can't arrange to have things ready to move as of April 1st as we might not pass the budget, might not pass it until March 31st. That is exactly why several jurisdictions, particularly jurisdictions that are challenged with supplies and remoteness, do split their capital budgets to a fall sitting from the fiscal operating budget that happens in the winter sitting, because if we don't pass it now, can't do all those things so we're left waiting to see what may or may not happen. So in a jurisdiction, Mr. Chair, where we have heard, many of us in this room, talk about uncertainty as acting as a chill on private investment, Mr. Chair, voting down a capital budget in October is a chill on private investment. We are deciding not to support the private sector in the Northwest Territories on small capital projects, on large capital projects, on projects on which they depend. So this puts projects at risk. Not all of them. Not all of them, Mr. Chair. Some might kick around and some might wait until April, but it certainly undermines planning, it certainly does stop the procurement, it doesn't promote private sector, and it tells everyone that we're prepared to sacrifice every single other project in here for other principled positions. And, Mr. Chair, I don't -- I know that -- I have certainly been in this room now for many years. I've had an MLA colleague on the other side in the last government vote against the capital budget every single time on principle, every time. So that's fair. I don't want to at all be seen to be suggesting that that's not an appropriate stand to take at some times, but let's be clear about what we are voting down if that's the choice that we're making.

Mr. Chair, on that note, again, I want to make sure that I -- I want to be fair. Cabinet sometimes -- one of the hardest things of being on Cabinet, we have constituents, we have residents, we hear from people. The challenges are not lost on us, and the idea that they are is unfair. But the conversations that we have as a group of 19 Members, in my view, respectfully, go far more and far beyond the idea that we're just not listening or trying hard enough, that the public servants, senior members, right down to the frontlines don't care and aren't trying hard enough, and that somehow by voting down the budget, that changes that.

Point of Order.

All right.

I'm going to go to the Member from Range Lake to the Point of Order.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, under Rule 3.3(2) -- or 3.2(3), the Minister is alleging that Members during this debate have attacked the integrity of the public service in handling issues, and I do not recall anyone saying that. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister of Finance to the Point of Order to respond.

Mr. Chair, I am more than happy to retract those comments. I certainly didn't want to leave any impression that Members of this House don't respect the public service. So I apologize, and I take it back.

You got time. Continue. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I do want to speak to the letter that was sent, much of which was ultimately read into the House.

Mr. Chair, that letter was very lengthy and spoke at many points about wanting to see a plan, see a cultural shift, to see leadership change, then in other respects to see a plan, again, to see more changes in policy, to see changes in procedure, to see action plans, to see ambitious planning, and so on and so forth. That's not all that was there, Mr. Chair. I certainly don't want to leave that impression either. But that is a lot of requests for different plans, different processes, different policies, different approaches to leadership. And, Mr. Chair, it was our effort in engaging in the conversations that we did to respond to that with proposals for leadership change, with proposals for policy change, and with an approach that could lead to the culture shift that would then accomplish all of what's in these letters and what all of us here want to see.

Mr. Chair, there's millions of dollars pouring in to the territory for housing. It is not all coming to the housing corporation of the Northwest Territories. Now, that said, the housing corporation in the last several years has been successful in seeing significant, tens of millions of investment, come in. The federal funding cycle does not always align well to our funding cycle, and so I'm not in a position to sit here and say that we can remove the word notional from the $50 million commitment that we expect to be able to make. I don't want to sit here and pretend that I have an answer for that. I do believe that we'll be in a position to spend $50 million. And, in fact, I believe the housing corporation will probably be in a position to spend more. But, Mr. Chair, it's not fair or appropriate for me to simply say, no problem, and hope it's fine when I can't actually say exactly where it's going to come from. I do think it will find that money. There's engagement happening not only from the housing corporation but from the Department of Infrastructure and the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs with our federal counterparts to see these problems addressed. And some of the offers that we've made and the discussions that we've had around changes in leadership and changes in approach involve creating better systems for engagement with MLAs. One such -- for example, just ways by which we can bring one another together, we're all hearing from residents, and we want to make sure that we're doing that in a way that doesn't bring us to the brink of not passing a capital budget which again -- so, really, at that point, Mr. Chair, I'll wrap up with that.

There are projects throughout this capital budget that go to every single community. There are projects in this capital budget that go to small communities. There's projects in the capital budget that will link communities. Everything from transmission lines in Fort Providence, transmission line in Whati, there are housing projects, planning for long-term care facilities, extension of the Inuvik runway. Mr. Chair, I know we've been dealing with this for the last two weeks. At the same time, the conversation here isn't about all of these projects. I realize there is one other priority that people are concerned about, but we aren't going to advance the issue of meeting housing if we can't bring the supplies up on the road, particularly the Mackenzie Valley Highway. We aren't going to be able to connect those houses if they can't be connected to power systems. They are going to struggle if the municipal funding -- the multiple capital funding that is in here doesn't flow to the municipalities who are responsible for water and sewer systems, who are responsible for the waste management systems. It does all need to fit together.

It's a lean plan, Mr. Chair. I get that it's a lean plan. Everyone's heard me stand in the House and say that we have to already increase the borrowing limit. Times are challenging. But, again, the kinds of shifts that we were hoping to make to bring about these policy changes and to move forward in advance of the main estimates, and our hope was one that would respond adequately and allow us to get to a place in the main estimates that shows some of the outcomes of that policy, the policy shift and culture shift that every one of us Members in this House want to see. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Any other comments from Members? Thank you. The motion's in order. To the motion. It's been asked to have a recorded vote. Okay, thank you. To the motion.