Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In continuing my daily ritual of evaluating the performance of the McLeod government, today I want to reference my tabled document of Tuesday, September 29, 2015, and spend some time on our revenue concerns, both federal and own source.

By all accounts, our GNWT revenue grew by 149.79 percent from 2000 to today, and was substantially more than operation spending growth of 115 percent during the same period. However, with federal transfers currently accounting for more than 70 percent of GNWT revenue, and with only modest NWT population growth over these 15 years, we should be concerned of what current negative trend in population growth truly means. In fact, it is in the 2015-16 year where we see the single largest negative revenue growth of minus 1.01 percent, and if you put this side by side with our operational spending at 2.15 percent, you can clearly see this is not a balanced budget process, as it’s been portrayed, but a true deficit process.

While we are told and soothed when we have an operational surplus, it is important to note that this is not entirely true, as this book adjustment surplus is already spent in our capital budget process.

The second source of our revenue is through own- source revenue, and this revenue grew by 143.2 percent from

2000 to 2016 or ’15, far more than the

inflation but less than total revenue. Our own- source revenue is more variable than federal transfers due to the volatility and the forecasting of our corporate taxes collected. We would all agree that increasing own-source revenue through taxes would likely increase the cost of living, and it is

worthy to note that corporate and personal income taxes in the NWT are among the lowest in Canada.

To pass praise where praise is due, the January 2015 Fraser Institute graded

Canada’s Premiers

based on corporate and personal income taxes or changes in tax rates. Now, although not specifically mentioned in this Fraser Report, Premier McLeod would place, and as I’m saying, the best in the country, first place on corporate taxes and second place on personal income taxes, and by these measures Premier McLeod would have been second overall of all the Premiers in Canada, behind Alberta.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

---Unanimous consent granted

I appreciate the Minister sharing those numbers, and thanks for the information. No further questions. Thank you.

So it is safe to say that we have roughly 100 kilometres that we are talking about and over the four-year stretch, how many kilometres are anticipated to be rehabilitated, resurfaced and brought to a so-called standard as we are doing it in a piecemeal approach? Is it 40 of those kilometres, 50 of those kilometres? I’d like to get an understanding. What is the target of the department after this four-year bundle? Thank you.

I will have to decipher that coded message. I guess the question I have is within the four-year bundle cycle that we hear, so from kilometre 245 to kilometre 339, would we assume that between those two numbers that the complete stretch will be resurfaced and reconditioned and rehabilitated to a road that is not what we see today? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your wisdom there. Thank you very much. I guess when we’re talking about sections of the road, I think it’s important for us to make sure that we’re describing the right sections. People looking back at transcripts are trying to figure out what exactly does this mean. I think anyone would not disagree that the 100 kilometre stretch between here and Behchoko is probably one of the most difficult sections of highway probably in the Northwest Territories and probably one of the most well-travelled ones in the Northwest Territories, so any improvements in that 100 kilometre

stretch

would

definitely

be

an

improvement. I know the Member for Monfwi is probably agreeing with me.

We heard about a multi-year investment, and again, we’re doing sections at a time in terms of improvements, embankment improvements and drainage improvements, but I think the public really needs to know at what point in time can we safely say that that stretch of road between Yellowknife and Behchoko would be completely redone, resurfaced and, as I like to put it, as smooth as we can. Thank you.

I appreciate the details there. When I’m hearing kilometre 275 to 278 and so forth, I’m assuming these are the kilometres between here and Behchoko. I believe we’re starting from kilometre 0, which I believe is Fort Providence. Is that my understanding? Or south of that?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This will probably be my last opportunity to talk about Highway No. 3. I know Mr. Menicoche thought I was going to say Highway No. 7 but, sorry. Highway No. 3. We know this is a multi-year project. I believe this is part of a bundle that was being funded here through one of the Building Canada Plan projects. But to get a bit more perspective, what should we expect? What is the budget in terms of the completion? Is there a certain target on Highway No. 3 that we’re going to try to complete for this capital budget?

Thank you. One final question. Are we safe to assume that the contractor is in a so- called “ready, go” position for this upcoming winter season, that we have all the trucks in place, all the people, their employees in place? This $30 million that is appropriated today in conjunction with the $4 million reserve last year, is it going to be sufficient to say that we should have a pretty good completed project at the end of this construction season? Thank you.

We also know that, I believe, there was a contingency reserve fund put aside within this project. I can’t remember the exact number, but I believe it was around $5 million. Has any of that contingency money been used, and if so, how much and for what and is there any anticipation that that contingency fund might be used in this upcoming construction season? Thank you.