Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of privilege. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to lay out why I make this point of privilege this morning -- or this afternoon. There's two parts to meet the initial threshold. Question of privilege, as you know, Mr. Speaker, must be raised at the earliest opportunity. The nature of the matter described must show on its face to be a breach of privilege.
Mr. Speaker, I became aware of some accusations made last night only after the rise of House. This is my first opportunity to bring this matter forward. As to the second part of the test, I'd like to read what was written and then detail for you why it is my view that these statements impede my ability as to act as a Minister generally and the finance Minister specifically being the Minister responsible for negotiations in support of an operating budget that reflects the priorities of this Assembly and on behalf of the people of the territory.
Mr. Speaker, when I arrived home yesterday evening, I read on Facebook a post by another Member of this House the following -- I'll excerpt only one part of the second paragraph, which is this: The 2025 Budget is on rails. As long as Cabinet has their supporters in line, the entire process is little more than accountability theater while backroom deals are being made.
Mr. Speaker, for a matter to be accepted as a breach of privilege, there's two aspects and, in my view, this meets both.
First, is that a Member was impeded in the performance of parliamentary functions in the sense of being prevented from carrying out parliamentary duties; and second, that the matter is directly related to a proceeding of parliament.
I'd like to deal with the second aspect of that rule first, namely, that this point of privilege is directly related to a proceeding in this House.
Yesterday, in Committee of the Whole, Cabinet was taken by surprise with the motion brought to the floor seeking to remove over $5 million from ECE's operating budget. No Member of Cabinet, including the Minister of ECE, had notice of the motion. And as such, it would be impossible for any Member of Cabinet to have spoken to MLA colleagues about the motion or about the budget as it may be impacted by the motion. And nevertheless, when I arrived home last night and read this statement, it implied that the vote on the motion was the result of backroom deals and/or that the advancement of discussions about the operating budget is merely a theater. The allegation that work of this Assembly is nothing more than theater or that there are backroom deals being made in order to advance this budget is very much directly related to the work we do in this House and my role as the finance Minister.
As to the first part of the test more specifically, namely the impediment -- the impeding of my ability to carry out my responsibilities as a Minister on behalf of the people of the Northwest Territories, Mr. Speaker, this post, in my view, puts a chill on all relationships as elected officials and on our ability to communicate one on one. Bluntly, Mr. Speaker, this social media post creates a threat that if MLAs do not vote with certain other MLAs or if they choose to speak directly to Cabinet Members, there may be accusations on some type of social media.
The context of social media is important. We are living in an era where social media is being increasingly used as a weapon. It is an unregulated space. There is no fact checking. The risk of cyberbullying and trolls and the like is well known, and it is often a particularly dangerous space for public figures.
The impediment to my ongoing work personally caused by this situation is this: In consensus government, I must have the support of MLAs to pass the operating budget, to pass the capital budget, and also to pass legislation. There are committee processes that support negotiations but one-on-one conversations are not only appropriate, they are expected by the residents who elected their representatives, and Ministers must be able to check in with MLAs informally to get a frank reaction or to hear in detail when an issue impacts their riding.
Mr. Speaker, this public statement on social media undermines the ability to have those frank conversations between MLA Members and myself and other Ministers. I should not have to worry whether I or the person I may have spoken to will find ourselves vilified in some fashion on social media. I should be able to reach out and discuss any matter one on one with an MLA or within a committee proceeding, and particularly as I continue to use that broader committee process for our overall discussions. None of this, Mr. Speaker, is a theater, and to suggest otherwise undermines my ability to utilize the processes of this House.
It is my responsibility as a Minister, and again particularly as the Minister of Finance, to know what individual Members want to see changed in the budget. It is not my obligation to share every detail of every conversation I've had with every other Member of the Assembly, but it has always been my practice to ultimately conclude negotiations through the chair of AOC, to stand in this House and to publicly detail what changes have been agreed to, not in a backroom fashion.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, this false assertion of backroom dealings, or being a budget on rails, threatens my ability to discharge my obligation as a Minister in the function of this House and impedes my ability to engage with MLAs freely so that we have a government with a meaningful legislative agenda and an operating budget that reflects the political priorities we set as an Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.