Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, it actually might be interesting to look back on what the actuals in this area have been over a longer period of time. So the last couple of years, in particular, have been difficult for the mineral resource industry and things have been coming in low, but the value of $6.1 million here is one that, again, do we want to look at this $3 million? You know, we can certainly -- can certainly take it back. But, again, I'd want to look back at a longer stretch of time to have a better sense of just how much variability there is between the actuals and mains, and then also we'd want to probably go over to my friends at ITI and see if they can have a better sense of what the future might bring in this space and whether or not we are going to achieve that $6.1 million. So I'll leave it there at the time, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'll go back to the Member from Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't want to prescribe the whole industry of either lawyers or accountants, but we all know they're cautious and pessimistic by trade so being optimistic on estimating financials seems to be so counterintuitive to the nature of lawyers and accountants, and I would just find it concerning because if they're not in touch with the issues of what's happening today, in other words, we're not -- you know, diamonds are down, gas is not coming out of the ground, oil's tapping out, people are not working, cost of living is going up, I mean, I just don't know how people would see these as realistic numbers and that's really the issue I'm trying to draw. I mean, we're not going to get anywhere kind of trying to pierrot back and forth saying, wow, we picked the numbers. But basing these on longer term trends, while I think the down trend has been it before years the only jurisdiction that is not showing economic promise is us in comparison to our two sister territories. So I'm just not sure -- back to the point of saying conservatives and lawyers are -- conservatives. My apologies. Lawyers and accountants are very conservative, I was trying to say, in their budgeting estimates and predictions, and I just find it strange it seems overly optimistic, that's all. Thank you

Thank you. I take that as a comment, or was there a question to the Minister?

Okay, we'll just take that as a comment, then. Thank you for that. Next on my list I have is the Member from Great Slave.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Since we are under the MBS category, I was curious to ask the Minister how MBS is going to support and action a macro economic policy and if there's any anticipated costs or if this is a role mainly for departments to take on. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I probably will turn that one to the deputy minister for some detail. There wouldn't be added cost, at least not anticipated at this time, Mr. Chair. It is -- you know, has been drafted, I believe has or will be going to committee for their consideration and -- before being implemented. It's a tool that's used to help bring a lens of understanding on some of the submissions that come through as decision papers to see whether or what impacts from a macro economic lens things are having. But if I could, Mr. Chair, just on detail of sort of the next steps, I'll turn to the deputy minister.

Thank you. I'll go to the deputy minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So as the Minister mentioned, the macro economic policy is -- framework policy is intended to give FMB the tools that it needs and the information that it needs to determine what the macro economic implications are, the decisions it makes. So the way FM -- or MBS supports, and the Department of Finance supports, departments in doing that is that our fiscal policy division provides input into -- it's a series of questions that departments have to answer or fill out this questionnaire that will go into the MBS -- or, first of all, the department's submission, and then ultimately the MBS assessment of the FMB decision papers.

And then as far as where we are at in terms of implementing, we're revising the macro economic framework policy because it exists already but we're just updating it, and it's been sent to AOC on November 28th, so we're engaging with committee on it, and we'll have the revised macro economic policy in place sometime early this year, so sometime in the next few weeks. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go back to the Member from Great Slave.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So that's -- I can understand that. I can understand it's a lens that you put in decision papers, so thank you for that.

So historically, this division has supported the government renewal initiative. I know that they continue to, I believe, renew -- review these initiatives that come in from departments. I understand, too, that there's movement to eventually put that work back on departments and put that in their wheelhouse. But will GRI be used to support any ongoing fiscal sustainability objectives of the GNWT? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And, yes, absolutely. Part -- a big part of the GRI work, and particularly with respect to the movement to have departments involved in doing and completing their first, second, and third rounds of evaluations under the GRI framework, is to create a culture whereby we are in a continuous evaluation, we are able to undertake and know that we are undertaking reviews of our programs. That was not necessarily a very structured, organized, or enforced process prior to GRI. So by doing so, we are better placed going forward on programs, particularly -- well, I was going to say particularly new ones but there's quite a selection right now. So it really is an opportunity to bring that about so that there's a continuous culture that we are able to say is something working, is it getting value, and then all of us here have that information available to us to decide whether we want to continue to fund something or if you want to shift funding to something that's being particularly successful or shift funding away from something that's not succeeding as we all hope it to be. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And so I guess to get a little granular -- and I apologize if this is -- this is just sort of spitballing, but is there a contemplation, then, that programs that undergo evaluation will be noted in future submissions to FMB? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Mr. Chair, we do get regular updates with respect to progress on GRI which at this point was involving the different -- different programs chosen by each department. We are providing training and supports through MBS over in fiscal -- our fiscal division over to departments to do that evaluation work in an ongoing way. And, yes, then that information goes through reviews is supposed to come back, each program evaluation comes back to the financial management board, Cabinet, and certainly happy to ensure that that's getting shared regularly. I believe it is getting shared regularly with committee but we can -- again, happy to make that commitment so that if or when it comes to this floor in terms of if there's program changes or if there's financing changes, we all have that information about what appears to be working versus not. Thank you.

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

Thanks, that's good to hear. And I guess I'll be a little more explicit. Is there a contemplation that the success of a program would be flagged specifically with an FMB submission such that the success or possibly areas for improvement would be a factor in the decision-making? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to say yes, but I just want to be clear that I -- to my understanding, there's not -- you know, in the decision papers, templates, which are in the financial administration manual, and actually are online, there wouldn't necessarily be a line item right now that says GRI compliant or GRI -- you know, has proceeded through GRI. I'm certainly happy to consider looking at that. So again, if there's benefit, that's a decision for more than just me sitting here right now. But if that's something that departments find helpful, if the analysts find helpful, yes, again, I'm a big fan of GRI -- I know the Member is as well -- so happy to look at ways to better include that culture evaluation in what we do. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll go to the Member from Great Slave.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I cede the rest of my time.

Okay, thank you. Next on my list I got is the Member from Frame Lake.