Thank you. Committee, we will now consider the Department of Health and Social Services. Please turn to the departmental summary on page 38.

Health and social services, 2025-2026 Capital Estimates, $61,932,000. Does the committee agree?

Thank you, committee. We will now consider the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment. Please turn to the departmental summary on page 45.

Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment, 2025-2026 Capital Estimates, $6,649,000. Does committee agree?

Thank you, committee. We will now consider the Department of Infrastructure. Please turn to the departmental summary on page 53.

Department of Infrastructure, 2025-2026 Capital Estimates, $184,875,000. Does the committee agree?

Thank you. We will now consider the Department of Justice. Please turn to the departmental summary on page 62.

Department of Justice, 2025-2026 Capital Estimates, $1,480,000. Does the committee agree?

Thank you, committee. We will now consider the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs. Please turn to the departmental summary on page 67.

Department of Municipal and Community Affairs, 2025-2026 Capital Estimates, $39,923,000. Does the committee agree?

Thank you, committee. We will now consider Housing Northwest Territories. I will remind committee that Housing Northwest Territories is included in the capital estimate as an information item, and the totals are not voteable. Please turn to the summary found on page 72.

Does the committee agree that you have concluded consideration of this information item?

Agreed? Thank you. Committee, we have now concluded all previously deferred items in Tabled Document 193-20(1), Capital Estimates 2025-2026.

Committee, we have concluded all previously deferred items on Tabled Document 193-20(1), 2025-2026 Capital Estimates. Does the committee agree that you have concluded consideration of Tabled Document 193-20(1), 2025-2026 Capital Estimates? Agreed?

Sorry, I'm going to go to the Premier.

Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? Sorry, I'm going to go to the Member from Range Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know we're -- thank you, Mr. Chair. I know we're in a rush to get to another very important piece of this committee's work, but we do need to -- this is a House of debate, and we should be debating things.

So I never have been a fan of our political process here, and I've never seen a concurrence motion been brought forward by the government House Leader, the Premier, the finance Minister, any Member of Cabinet before. I think that's significant. And I just spoke to my honourable friend next to me, who has served a number of years more than I have, and neither he can remember a time when such concurrence motion's been brought forward by a Minister.

I think that speaks to the fundamental disagreement that some Members of this House have with how we've approached -- how we are approaching our priorities as a government. This -- the committee of accountability and oversight issued a report about the capital estimates with a broader mandate to look at how the priorities -- the four priorities of the government being met, particularly around health care and housing, and ultimately found that the response to date from government was lacking. The finance Minister mentioned this in her closing comments.

What we have been offered in response to those concerns, a commitment to remove derelict units, reviewing rent scales that haven't been looked at in ten years, a three-year notional housing plan worth $150 million, and I should note notional means un -- like costed but unfunded. So it's just a plan that could show what could happen if it was funded.

I don't think that's what we meant as a committee when we said prioritize health care. We wanted houses built. We look to our sister territory in Nunavut. A third of their capital budget is being spent on housing. I'm sure people will say well, they budget differently. But the point is people in Nunavut understand that their government is prioritizing housing. They're building 350 homes. We are building 150 homes, or doors I should say. We need to do a better job. We need to do a better job on housing. We need to do a better job on health care and a whole bunch of other files, but to narrow it down to those two, the two most pressing issues, the top priorities of this Assembly, is what this committee was trying to urge the government to do. The actions that have been promised are not sufficient enough. We need some deliverables that we can take back home to our ridings that matter to people.

Members recommended things like shift premiums for nurses and health care professionals, minimum contract lengths, 500 homes were kicked around at one point. We were offering tons of ideas to try to get something concrete out there so people know we're making a big bold action. When I talk to health care professionals in my riding, they are used to the talk, they are used to the town halls, the employee engagement surveys, but they're not used to action. And that's what they're saying; that's why they're so deformalized. It's a lot of talk, a lot of strategies, a lot of planning. But they want to see something. And we haven't provided it as a government yet. We're on our one-year mark, and we still haven't provided it.

So we don't make the declaration that we can't support capital lightly. We understand that they're different things, that it is not the same as an operations and maintenance budget. But the point was this was our next opportunity to speak to the -- to speak to finances. And in any other government, that kind of lack of support would be akin to a confidence motion. And I think Canadians and -- well, Northerners and Canadians are well aware of what the consequences of that are with the situation in Ottawa right now. If the House does not have confidence in government then there's an election, in most places except here.

So when we made that declaration, it was an announcement that we lack confidence in how we're moving, we need to course correct, we desperately need to course correct. Because that's what we're hearing from our constituents. And I am not satisfied that we have done that. I am not satisfied that we are making significant investments in health care or housing. I think we're doing the -- I think we're taking a status quo approach with a commitment to try harder. And I appreciate the effort. I appreciate that we have to do planning, that there's been, you know, units and ADMs assigned, and those resources brought to bear but, again, it's more talk, it's more planning. We need some big commitments upfront, so people know things are going to get better. That's why we're here at the end of the day, to make things better, to fix problems. So it was not -- it was not a -- it's not theater to say we're going to -- we don't support the capital budget. And I think Members may -- I mean, we'll see how the end vote -- how the votes end up today, and I'm sure Members will have things to say. I'm sure some Members will change their tune from that initial report. But I hope we all appreciate the significance of where we're at and how far along this road we've come.

If we're going to make this government work, then we all need to be speaking the same language, and we all need to be prioritizing the same things and understanding how to prioritize the same things. I don't think we're there yet. And saying no to the capital budget is not saying no to all these infrastructure projects which are important. I know they're important. I know they're important in many people's ridings. It's to send a very strong message that we desperately need to course correct or we can't get on with the regular business of supply that governments do. We can't get on with governing until we solve this problem and course correct. That was the point of this message. I know it hasn't been lost on our constituents. I know we've been talking about it at length. But we do need to do better. And we need to deliver something tangible, something real, something that shows people that we are listening to them. I do not believe we've achieved that with the commitments made to our report, and as a result I will not be supporting this budget. Thank you.

Thank you. To the motion.

Member from Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, you know, these capital budgets are not the same as operational budgets, and I think that that's very important, you know. In other words, this is roads versus this is employee salary. It's not that simple, but in a sense, if you're trying to decide, you know, why this budget matters versus the other one, the timeliness of some of the questions -- my good colleague here next to me, he's right. Like, we don't have a lot of opportunities to say truly hold the feet of -- the government's feet, that is, to the fire with respect to important needs. I mean, the asks or the requests by the Regular Members don't come lightly. It's hard enough getting, you know, all of us together on the same song sheet. We are literally 11 independent parties that occasionally work together, and it takes a lot to, you know, get us all on the same page. If not, it's an impossible task. But what we did see this time around is such unanimity around many of the topics highlighted, again, just recently by my colleague, you know, such as housing as an example. I felt it was very important to be -- to demonstrate solidarity to send the message of housing matters.

I like numbers, so I'm going to throw a couple out here. I won't do them too fast, so they resonate. It was -- it's approximately 352 days since the last territorial election. Where's the housing file? It's approximately 340 days since the Members' speeches in this House about, you know, all the things we're going to do. All we heard about was housing and helping people, you know, even bigger centres wanted to help little centres, little communities or small communities. We wanted to be part of the solution. It's been approximately 329 days since Cabinet was picked. And yet we don't see the government as, you know, a war time mandate with the enthusiasm that we're going to make housing number 1, even though it was so loudly spoken. You know, without a number here in the sense of, you know, it's just over 300 days since the -- we met with the territorial leaders at the Tree of Peace. What was the number one issue everybody talked about? Housing. I feel like saying can I get an amen with the congregation here. It's true, though. It's true.

You know, and I get the interim budget was, in theory, keep the lights on. You know, I get it. I get it. And I supported that. And I think that's a reality. But then when we came in in the May/June budget, you know, where was the system listening to the leaders of this House, the leaders of the territory, the people of the territory, when everyone's saying housing matters? You would think in any system, you know, once they heard those consolidated echos of passion saying we want to make a difference on housing, they would literally stop the factory floor, you'd hit the button, the red light would go on, and say we're retooling for housing. Why? Because these people, these 19 people were sent to this building to make housing -- like, make a difference in housing. So we tried a couple weeks ago. We sent our letter. And, you know, I mean, it should have been written with invisible ink some days I think, because that's how it feels like the answers get. You know, holding it up, I don't see anything from the Members, let's just keep on.

And then there's the fracturing. Well, you know, there's the implied, whether it's direct or indirect or the pressure, oh my God, what's going to happen if we don't support the budget as given? And what happens if we don't support it as given in a timing? So in other words if you don't support this, well, who knows what's going to happen. Can't tell you. Beware of -- well, just beware.

Mr. Chairman, it's approximately 1,039 days left in this mandate before the next election. And some days I think, man, that's -- I wish it would come sooner. Because, you know, I really thought -- I believed, not thought -- I believed in holding the line because housing mattered. Now, I generally mean this commitment which is, you know, I feel very strongly about saying let's just put 500 houses in the communities. Let's do it. You know, that's somewhere between, you know, 12, 13, or even as high as 15 depending where it is. Why, as a Yellowknife MLA, would you say let's focus in on that first? And I -- I'll be frank about it. Because it's important. And the reason it's important is because people are coming from the regions and the communities because of the housing suitability and accessibility. It's just not there in some of those places. They -- you know, or they get a government house and a modular that rolls into town, the government heats it for two years, and everybody's staring at it. Boy, that's at a sore thumb. Nothing -- you know, the equating -- getting results for people is what hopefully we all ran for. To take pressure off Yellowknife. Yellowknife has a land issue with getting housing.

Now, I'm sure someone's going to say I'm wrong on this and that, but the truth of the matter is access to land is a big issue to get houses built here. We have developers that build big tracks of opportunities, whether small apartments, houses, apartment buildings, row houses. People want to build in Yellowknife. It's land. But housing solves the community problems. And I would never disagree that more public housing in Yellowknife wouldn't help. My goodness, that is certainly an important thing. But I just that that -- let's -- the other aspect is, Mr. Chairman, and I really want to stress this, if we could focus on an effort to have the greatest impact, I thought that would have an immediate ripple effect on everybody. Help Yellowknife, help the regions, help the communities, help families who are struggling. So, Mr. Chairman, I couldn't agree more. This notional -- let's put it differently. It's hypothetical. It's theoretical. It's well-intended. It would have been a monumental shift in doing business in recognizing the important story the Members are telling on this side of the House had our initiatives been adopted a little more. And that's really what's frustrating when you're on this side of the House. You know, my favorite saying is the government will always be there when they need you. Yeah, well, you know, if they don't need you, well, you're on your own.

Honestly, some of these initiatives didn't do a single thing for me personally in the sense of the riding in Yellowknife Centre. I didn't necessarily see it always helping Yellowknife at large. I saw it as helping the territory as a whole. And to me, the fabric is weaved very tightly together. And I'm -- I want to take only a -- like, a 30 second step off this, which draws the comparison -- although it's not completely on topic, so I want to recognize I'm doing this on purpose, which is when I'm arguing about the importance of what's happening in Fort Smith is I'm not trying to save a jail. And I told that to the people I spoke to on the phone. No, I'm not trying to save an empty jail. I have no interest in that. I have an interest in saving 32 jobs that make a difference in a region. I see this as helping the fabric of the North. I see possibilities for making sure families are sustainable, healthy, and whatnot. And that's why the housing to me mattered in the communities. How do we bolster our territory? You know, someone tried to give a poke at me yesterday saying I'm only doing this because I want to be in Cabinet. That wasn't it. It matters. It matters. And I was kind of offended by that pure suggestion. It matters helping people wherever they are. And if you can go home at night and sometimes remember you helped somebody, my goodness you sleep the best sleep you've had in a long time. And when you know you've done your best and sometimes you don't cross it over the line, well, you know, you still feel darn good. And they see it on your face when you put the effort. I thought some of their suggestions were going to do that.

So, Mr. Chairman, I didn't expect to take eight minutes, and I sincerely apologize, that wasn't the intent. But I am frustrated because, like I said Members' suggestions, I often deeply feel -- and I'm going to stress, I feel like we write them in invisible ink, and that's what happens to them. You know, and it's just frustrating when you're sitting there trying to help people, not yourself, people, families, make them healthy, make them strong, empower them, help their independence, because we all want good people, you know, and all want good results, Mr. Chairman. So I apologize, a little bit of a rant, but I am frustrated and certainly disappointed.

I won't leave it to a mystery, but I'll let people wonder which way I'm going with this one, which way I'll vote. But I do think a recorded vote on this very matter will be key for Northerners to see if they want to take a point in time to ask who dug in the sand for something that's meaningful. And I feel that this one mattered. And it would have had a monumental achievement recognizable about our efforts and our passion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. To the motion. I'm going to go to the Member from Inuvik Boot Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairman, when we were elected, we sat down here, all 19 of us, we sat in the conference room out there and we talked about what we wanted to do. Those who wanted to put their names forward for Cabinet talked about what they wanted to do. We talked about a top down approach. My background is corporate. Certainly, you know, I feel that in order for real change to happen, it has to happen from the top down. You have to have that leadership. We can't keep doing the things we've always done and expect a different result. We know that. It's been said many times. And, you know, and that was a conversation everybody said yes, I want to get in there and I am going to make these changes. We know we've had problems. This is -- the last government had problems. You know, they left some problems that we've had to deal with. And that personally is what I wanted to see.

In the first part of our term here, you know, I wasn't necessarily seeing that. And I said, listen, you know, I want -- I don't -- I want it to be driven by us. I want it to be driven by the people that we've elected to govern. I want Cabinet Ministers to take information from the committees that we have, from Members on this side of the House as well, and to take that and implement those changes.

So, Mr. Chair, what tools do we have if we don't feel that that's being done? Well, one of the tools we have in our toolbox is our ability obviously to vote on budgets. Now, it's not lost on me that in this case we're actually asking for operational change but we're voting on a capital budget. The main estimate budgets, the operations budget, we voted on three months ago. But we weren't happy with where we were so we're to take this opportunity, this is a tool we have to kind of go back and, you know, obviously you -- everyone has heard the report we read. I actually did a Member's statement on that as well that we need to see change before we can support this.

You know, we talk about course correction. We've had -- you know, we talk about real change. We've had, you know, what I think is significant briefings between the report and now, we've had many meetings obviously with Ministers, and we've been given commitments in those meetings, you know, what they want to do to change that. And the question is, I guess, from our side is are we willing now to say fine, has this message been heard, us doing -- you know, us submitting that report, has it been heard, and are you willing to take it now to say, listen, this is the information -- this is how we want you to govern. We want you to take some bold steps and do some bold things and change the course.

Now, we've heard in -- again, through those committee meetings and through those briefings that that is what this government is willing to do. It's going to remain to be said. So as we move forward, you know, we will -- we're one year in; we have three years left to go, we have a lot of work to do. We know that. I mean, I'm not 100 percent satisfied in everything I heard. There were certain things that were said and certain ideas that were brought to me that kind of gave me some, I guess, comfort that perhaps they are listening and perhaps we will get some of this work done. I'm not really interested personally there was -- you know, the capital budget is $300 million. Again, we're making -- we're asking for operational changes on the capital budget. There are things in that capital budget that are important that we need to move forward as well. I do not disagree housing is one of our main priorities, our top priority, but there are other priorities as well, and there are things in this capital budget that I want to see move forward. So that's not lost on me as well, Mr. Chair.

You know, so the question I ask myself is am I willing to allow Cabinet to follow through on the commitments that they've said they would do, and then of course I will, as I'm sure my colleagues will as well, make sure that we're holding them to account as we move forward. This is not the only time we'll get to vote on a budget in this sitting in this legislature. It's only the second time we've gotten to do it. So am I willing to do that? And that's the question, Mr. Chair, that I ask myself when I move forward, do I want to see this budget pass so we can get some of these important capital projects moving forward and has my message been heard or our message been heard that, you know what, there are tools in our toolbox we can use to hold this government to account and to make sure that change is being implemented from the top down as we anticipated -- as we all said we we do when we sat 19 of us together when we first got elected and continue to do that, Mr. Chair.

So I will be supporting the capital budget as it moves forward. I'm in a position now, and I will be holding this government account as we moved forward when we get these important projects going, and I look forward to the next main estimates as well where I'm hoping we're going to see some changes to both health and housing in that budget. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion. Next on my left I have the Member from Monfwi.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, being here, we -- we are not here only for us, you know. We have to keep in mind the people, especially the young children, we are here for the future generations. We have -- every decision that we make here, we have to keep the future generation in mind, the little children, the babies that are not born yet. What kind of life do we want them to live in the future, you know? I know we want something bigger, better for them, that -- and it's not just only to this legislature. It's also -- it also goes for other government as well. For example, Indigenous government. Because that's what we've been hearing a lot from our governments. And, you know, like, it's -- that's what we have to do. And when I was first campaigning in 2021, July 2021, I talked to a lot of elders, and a lot of elders have said you cannot do this alone. If you want things to move forward, you got to cooperate, you got to work together. Only one person cannot do it. This is what I heard from my elders. And some of those elders are no longer with us. Because whatever decision we make, it's going to have an impact on our people, you know, the citizens of the Northwest Territories and our constituents. So we always have to keep them in mind. But it's the elders' advice, some of the elders are no longer with us, it's still with me, and I'm still hearing it from some of the elders out in the communities, you know, when you go visit them. When I go visit them, they talk to you. And so I have to keep that in mind.

And here, I know that housing is going to improve. A lot of things, a lot of social problems, education outcome. We know that having sufficient housing that will end the homelessness, it will solve the problem. We know that. We know that for a fact. But in my riding, there's the Frank Channel bridge, you know.

I lived in Behchoko almost all my life. And we're being -- we're using bus to travel -- for nine years, I travel on the bus, school bus, from Behchoko to Edzo to get to school. And we're still doing that now. And we're travelling on that Frank Channel bridge which a lot of people are hesitant, they are scared to travel on that bridge, not knowing if it's going to collapse. They fear -- they're fearful of that thinking it's going to collapse. It's just the way that -- because of the condition that it's in. So with that in mind, you know -- so the Frank Channel bridge, it's a lifeline to Yellowknife as well and to all the mining companies. So it really needs to be upgraded, and it should have been done a long time ago. But it's in the capital project right now, so I'm happy about that.

And Whati transmission line, you know, if any of you have been to Whati, you will see a big generator in the center of town. A lot of young people, a lot of young people my age, you know, like, the older generation, they grew up with that big generator right in the center of town; it's very loud, and it's not good. So I'm very glad that, you know, they're doing the transmission line from Whati to Snare hydro which is greatly needed. And with the high cost of living and a lot of people have complained to me that they are spending lot of money paying for their electrical -- electricity. So I heard that, so that's -- you know, that's good.

And the school in Behchoko, the school in Behchoko, it was built -- Chief Jimmy Bruneau School was built in Edzo. It was not the choice of the people. It was the choice of the federal government. So what the federal government wanted to do was to relocate the people to Edzo because there's better -- they're going to build more, they're going to give us more, better services, they're going to do underground water, everything. That was their intention. And I do -- right now, I do sympathize with a lot of other communities, remote communities, where this is what the federal government did to them. And, you know, they have no choice because they make their living over there in some of the small northern communities and I'm so glad that Tlicho people did not, you know, follow the federal government request to relocate to Edzo.

So the new school that's being proposed right now, it's going to be built in Behchoko, and I'm happy about that. And I even have a little grandson, you know, and I don't think I want him to travel from Behchoko to Edzo to attend junior high and high school. Like, I would like for him -- and there's a lot of other ones too -- and I think -- because when -- once you miss the bus too -- this is another thing too is that once you miss the bus, the school bus, you're out all day. And that's how I know that a lot of our young people fail. I blame some of the education outcome on that. Because we had a lot of poor attendance, and it still is because a lot of our young people are going to school in Edzo. At the beginning of school year, we have lots, but as the year goes on our attendance drops. So I do support that, the school. Because all these job -- all these programs, these projects, capital projects, it's going to create jobs. It's going to create more training opportunity. And here, we're -- we're hearing about it from a lot of other people where we're lacking trades. And this is a good opportunity for Tlicho -- hopefully education will, you know, partner with Tlicho government to provide more programs, trades programs, bring the training to the people to the community instead of our young people going out. Because of the housing crisis, there's a lot of our young people don't want to leave. They don't want to leave our community because they don't want to reapply for housing and be on the housing waitlist. And I have some young people that are on the housing waitlist for, like, five years, and it is a shame, and we do need more houses, you know. And I know that it's something that we're not going to stop talking about, you know, and then it is one of our mandate so we're going to make sure that this government, you know, live to the mandate that we all work together to create it.

So with that in mind, that, you know -- I mean, there's lots of things that we need in our communities. You know, we -- I know that this -- the government -- not just this government but the previous one too, we send a lot of people out for treatment program. So the government is spending thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars, you know, to deal with the substance abuse, with the drugs issues. And right now, a lot of our communities are facing -- you know, are having issues. You know, we have a lot of issues in small communities related to drug issues. And drug dealers, that's a breeding ground for them because they know that a lot of our young people -- not a lot of our young people, but living in the small communities there's not too many opportunities. Unemployment rate is high. So it's like there's no hope. So it's a breeding ground for drug dealers, you know, and victimizing our vulnerable young people, especially the children. The children are experimenting with these hardcore drugs now. So that has to stop. So the thing that I don't like is that what we need -- not only in Inuvik and Yellowknife, we need more of a transitional aftercare program where -- because they spend all the money sending out our people across Canada for a treatment program. Now they need to do something about those -- you know, how can we accommodate these young people coming back? Because we all know someone in our life that has an issue with drugs or alcohol but it's not the alcohol anymore; it's a drug issue, illicit drugs that's taking over many of the small communities. So I do have issues with that. We need that.

And we need more independent living unit for many of our elders in small communities, transitional housing. And I talked to a lot of young people -- a lot of unhoused people in my region, especially in Behchoko, where they are tired of being homeless. You know, they are tired of being homeless. They want a house. They call -- you know, they want a house so that they don't have to worry about where they're going to sleep tonight or tomorrow or anything like that. So -- and education and disability -- program for children with disability and all that. So with that in mind, I will support this budget. Thank you.