Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, no matter where you stand on the debate over carbon pricing, it has become clear that the Northwest Territories carbon pricing regime is leaving Northerners in the cold.
Several years after its introduction, the GNWT still cannot clearly state how successful its price on carbon has been at reducing emissions while their rebate system has not kept up with the increased in cost of living. In a previous Assembly, the Standing Committee on Government Operations clearly warned the government that their rebate strategy was inadequate and raised doubts regarding whether or not the GNWT could clearly grasp the impact that their carbon pricing regime would have on Northerners.
Mr. Speaker, the committee at the time raised a number of key concerns. It was missing too much information from the department, its concern regarding cost of living, the struggle to understand the effects on Northerners, the prioritization of large scale mining over small businesses and consumers, the lack of understandings on how emissions will be measured, and serious consultations with -- serious issues with how consultations were performed with not only the standing committee but members of the public. And this is all extending from previous issues that were raised by the standing committee of the 18th Legislative Assembly, of which I was a Member, that raised similar concerns at the time. So both times that this legislation has been brought forward in this House it has not had the endorsement of the standing committee, of its oversight committee, which is significant because the role of the standing committee is to improve bills. Both times the passage of the legislation has been contentious to say the least. It has passed. But it was not unanimous. It was by no means unanimous and not just drawn on straight ideological lines. This is not a matter of left versus right or conservative versus progressive of carbon tax versus the economy is stupid. You know, this is a much broader issue where individuals on both the -- who are very concerned with the future of the climate are unhappy with our carbon tax regime and people who are concerned about affordability are unhappy with it. And they say you know, good public policy that results in compromise leaves everyone unhappy. But when it's this significant, I think we need to ask ourselves is it really working? And for me, the fundamental question is, is carbon pricing as designed, this made-in-the North system, reducing emissions? I've asked that question, and the answer is we can't tell you because we don't know. And it is a complicated question. There's many factors that affect the reduction of emissions, but we should be able to have some idea of how this pricing is working to meet its intended public policy.
The public policy goal of carbon pricing is not to provide rebates to Northerners. That's a choice, a policy choice, that's been made to ensure that the cost of living is not unduly burdened and we drive people out of the Northwest Territories. But I think if you talk to Northerners, and we all have because we only recently were talking to them to get the seats we have in this House today, they will tell you that these costs are becoming increasingly unaffordable. And it's not just the carbon tax. Of course it's the high cost of fuel. It's the high cost of food. It's the high cost of rents. It's the high cost of mortgages. Everything's going up across the board. And we are simply not meeting the needs of Northerners, which is creating incentives for them to leave.
So when we look at our carbon pricing regime, we have to ask what are we doing with this? And I think what we've heard through successive -- through this finance Minister, the previous finance Minister as well, that this has been forced on the Northwest Territories. No one wants this but we have to do it, so we're going to build our own system to shield Northerners from the costs. Yet we see our sister territory Nunavut, and our friends in Yukon as well, they allow the federal government to collect the tax, administer the tax to the federal backstop, and still control their own rebate systems. So what this bill proposes to do is exactly that. It's to put the -- it's to cut out the middleman and put the responsibility back in the hands of the people who imposed this carbon tax regime on the Northwest Territories in the first place.
And there are good reasons to consider -- to consider the federal system if folks are concerned that a repeal of our system would lead to catastrophic consequences. Under the federal backstop, 90 percent of revenues collected by the federal government are returned to individuals through rebate cheques. The federal rebate covers the direct carbon costs for 80 percent of households in this country. Approximately 70 percent of households receive more in tax rebates than they receive -- than they pay in carbon taxes, and the remaining 10 percent of that tax, the 90 percent that goes to individuals, 10 percent goes to fund efficiency projects for small businesses, schools, and hospitals in each province and territory. This -- those -- that's just an example of what it looks like on the tin.
Now, what I think we'll be able to have more of a bespoke system that meets northern needs, that's why this bill was drafted expressly to leave the rebate system alone, and I know that some -- there are some critics of that. There are critics of the rebate system. But I think we can work on that as an Assembly together to fine tune it. But this bill represents a reset point where, again, we can put -- we can cut out the middleman, we can put the authority back in the hands of the federal government, of the Prime Minister, and he can defend this pricing system and work with our government to make it work for Northerners. I don't think if there's a change at the national level and this tax is repealed, I don't think there's anyone in this Chamber who is going to insist that we maintain our own. And to me, that doesn't speak as something that was created by Northerners for Northerners to meet northern priorities. That sounds like something that's been imposed on us. And if that's the way we feel about it, let's give it -- let's make the person responsible for it while we continue to direct the flow of revenue back into the rebate -- into the rebate programs that we've worked carefully to develop over the years. I believe this is possible. I don't believe we have such a poor relationship with the federal government that they will close the door on that initiative, and we won't be able to have those discussions.
I want to be clear, though, for those looking for an end to carbon pricing in the Northwest Territories, this bill will not achieve that. There's no -- because as soon as our tax goes, we'll be noncompliant with the federal legislation and the backstop will apply. There's no escaping carbon pricing, nor should there be. There should be a price on pollution. We live in a world that is irreconcilably affected by a changing climate. We just -- two-thirds of the Northwest Territories became climate refugees last summer. Our ice roads are unreliable. Like the mighty Mackenzie River is no longer reliable.
Our forest fire seasons are -- have become catastrophic. It's not just here. It's in other places as well. But this is evidence of a changing climate, a climate that demands action. So I want to be clear in my support for this legislation and bringing it forward it is not a rebuke of putting a price on pollution. But we have to put a price on pollution where it's not just a tax on people living in the Northwest Territories, where there's alternatives for low carbon options, low carbon fuels, low carbon technologies, that can allow Northerners to escape the tax and invest in something that can help -- that can help fight climate change. That's what we want. The technology's not -- just not there yet. And what this will have the effect is making sure people don't live here. And I don't think that's the goal. I don't think that's the goal of carbon tax. I know it's not the goal of carbon tax. It's to innovate. It's to create an environment where we can -- we can protect our climate and -- and, you know, do our part as individuals, as consumers.
So I would like to see us build something that works better, but I don't think we can continue on by continuing to demand exemptions as a government by having finance Ministers who consistently -- who insist that they'll repeal it if it's struck down at the federal level. That's not clear policy. It's confusing. It's muddled. We're not sure if we're supporting climate change. We're not sure if we're anti-carbon tax. We're just in this mushy middle. But we're one of only three jurisdictions that has their own system. Everyone else uses the federal backstop with either a -- the federal rebate program or their own rebate program. So, again, this bill is to provide policy clarity to the public, to our national partners, to our international partners, about who is responsible for carbon pricing and how we're going to administer it locally in the Northwest Territories.
And I want to be clear that I do -- I respect the work that my honourable colleague has done, the Minister of Finance, and I want her to be able to continue that work in partnership with Ottawa. But we need to give them the responsibility. We need to pass this legislation, hand the reins back to Ottawa so if there are changes in the future to the tax, whether it's repealed at the national level, whether there's a change to home heating fuel rebates, we're not waiting months for these things to happen, or we're not bringing back, you know, emergency debates to immediately strike it down. We can do this in a way that if there's changes at the national level, we're not mirroring them anymore. They just happen, and we just control the flow of the rebates. I think that's a much more neatly tied together system, and it clearly puts the responsibility back where it belongs with the federal government. And I call on this House to support this bill. Thank you very much