Bob Bromley

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I suppose the departure tax might be in line with some of the discussion that the Minister is having with the mines and so on to try to capture the entrance and exit of people from the Territories as they come to and fro from work. Will the Minister commit to leading the charge for ensuring that these measures are put together in an integrative and complementary way so we can enjoy the fullest range of benefits from them when we do put them in place? Will he recognize their relationship to each other and ensure that they take advantage of that opportunity? Mahsi.

Very good news to hear about the heritage fund intent. I’m happy to hear that some work is being done on the resource tax. Of course, times change and, as I say, there has been quite a shift, as well, in our thinking on the resource tax that, of course, would not affect the cost of living.

The tax shifting is of interest, though. Studies show that when taxes are lowered for low and middle income people, the money is spent priming the economy and improving standards of living. The studies also show that high income earners who get tax cuts spend their money on imported goods or they put it into...

Only recognizing the carbon content of fuels has proven to be an effective incentive to adopt operating measures that reduce greenhouse gas production and enhance vulnerability to taxes. Accompanying this must be an array of measures to assist people and businesses to shift from fossil fuels to the viable proven renewable energy uses that provide enhanced local employment opportunities, lower living costs and reduce harm to our environment.

Mr. Speaker, these measures taken together yield benefits on all fronts. They complement each other and must be advanced together. Some can start at low...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We continue to discuss options for new revenues, and in light of the recovering economy and full scaling up of production at our mines, it is timely, indeed, to be instituting new measures. Through consultations by the Department of Finance, many discussions by the public and comments by several Members, a clear consensus has emerged that more progressive tax measures are needed.

I believe a first priority is to implement a resource income tax to serve us until devolution of responsibilities is achieved. We have the capacity now to implement such a tax in a moderate way...

I appreciate those comments and that update. My last question here is we seem to be getting pretty wet seasons and certainly our falls have become quite wet compared to what they used to be with a lot of freeze/thaw cycles to it. We’ve had a good amount of work going with the Ingraham Trail, some work on the Dettah road and the Highway No. 3 and so on. Are there any observations or insights being collected on what this means to the cost of our capital projects and transportation in the Yellowknife region? Thank you.

That’s an amazing turnaround from what I had been told previously. Somehow we’re getting a cost efficiency of about 300 percent, which is wonderful news.

The Minister committed to me some time ago in the House that he would provide me with the plan and the full costing for the entire reconstruction of the Dettah road in preparation for chipsealing. I’ve never received that, but I understand from Mr. Neudorf that perhaps that work is still going on. I’d be happy to provide Hansard, if that’s of interest, but I’m still very interested in that and I’m encouraged to hear that perhaps we can do it...

Again, a typically opaque response from the Premier. I will take it, though, as a yes. I would also like to know, will the Minister commit to referral of both the JRP report and the NEB decision for review by Regular Members, commit to forwarding those reports to us for our direct input into the process? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The report that came out in the National Post today reporting that the federal government has decided not to proceed with its investment with the MGP really changes nothing in regards to the need for a comprehensive reply to the Joint Review Panel report. The federal government could reverse its decision at any time or economics could improve for unexpected reasons. The independent analysis and even the comments of the members of the Joint Review Panel indicate that GNWT negotiated a bad socio-economic benefits agreement for our public with the proponents. We even may...

Mr. Speaker, the reason I seek these assurances is because we did such a lousy job in the previous review of the submissions to the JRP panel. I really would like to hear the reiterative responses there. Recognizing that there is always demand on the staff and the expertise and to have a comprehensive and coordinated response, we need to have our staff ready to be able to reply within the time frames available. Will the Premier commit, and what preparations have been made to ensuring that our in-house expertise is clearing their desks and will be able to give a really meaningful piece of...

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate comments of the Premier on the news report and, like I say, I think, regardless of that, that could change any time. So we need to do this work. I will ask again, will the Premier, with the coordinated response of the split personalities of ENR and ITI apparently coordinating a review, as I understand it -- the Minister of ENR for the Joint Review Panel report, the Minister of ITI for dealing with the NEB documents and eventual decision -- will Members be assured of input to our responses? Will the Premier commit to ensuring our input to those responses? Thank you, Mr...