Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In this process of technology, my laptop died just before so I'm going to go with the roughest of notes with the most genuine of hearts. It's true; I always speak from my heart.
So, Mr. Speaker, regardless of the issue, I wish to speak to one theme I hope is true is the fact that when I do speak for an issue, I do care about it and -- in the sense of that the impact this has on Northerners is -- and the choices we make. Now, keep in mind the last Assembly barely passed its own mechanism to manage its own carbon tax processes and, frankly, I don't think they did enough time and enough soul searching to examine what's the best method for Northerners.
Now, it's not easy for me to say let's give it back to the feds to manage. I mean, I was here during devolution when all we talked about is making sure those people in Ottawa stop making choices for us; let us make our own choices. But, I mean, it's true on this particular one why would we carry the burden of the federal government system on this particular one?
I think, as my honourable colleague, who I appreciate initiating this -- the bill, the process, and conversation at the very least, has it right. I mean, if we cannot manage these things by knowing what they're doing, why are we doing them? And I mean, it's significantly stressful and I struggle with trying to figure out that if we don't know if it's having any positive impact, then I mean we have to question why are we doing these things? And then furthermore why are we shifting the burden on our citizens.
Now, I also agree the fact that there -- you know, there may be the slightest or thinnest or modest of veils that we don't know what's going to happen next. And that's not a defence of doing nothing. As a matter of fact, that's almost the worst defence of status quo, just because we do it this way we should continue with this way. But as the hallmark of asking what's relevant, why are so many jurisdictions choosing to use the federal system versus go with your own ways, the Northwest Territories is doing it.
I'm not convinced we're doing it better. I'm not convinced we can be as nimble with these types of responses and problems that we see across Canada. I'm convinced that the federal government still doesn't recognize our unique challenges. Yes, they've come part way in all fairness. I should tip my hat to that. But we must keep the advantage of working with them, and I think that they will find a way to work with us if we choose. So, Mr. Speaker, without the broadness of my finer detailed notes as my computer is just barely on now, I'll just leave it at that. But what's key to this, ultimately it's second reading, Mr. Speaker, is this gives the chance for this bill to go to committee to have the forthright and honest discussion. We will all have constituents that come to our door and say we think this is a good idea, then we'll walk out the next door and somebody will say no, this is the worst idea. But getting it to committee allows the committee to do the detailed analysis, the time, talk to people, talk to Northerners, talk to the mining industry, the construction industry, talk to all people to find out the impacts on how they feel on this one and what we can do. But most importantly, in that context, is what can we do better for them.
So in that service to the people of the North, I'll be supporting this bill, and I encourage all my colleagues to give it the opportunity for a full and a robust discussion with Northerners by giving it to committee so that we can have that honest consideration. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.