Kevin O'Reilly

Merci, Monsieur le President. I'm pretty exhausted. I don't have any formal speaking notes, I don't know how anybody else has managed to pull theirs together. But, you know, it's well known that I fundamentally disagree with Cabinet's fiscal framework that perpetuates overspending on capital, some of which is directed at large infrastructure projects of dubious merit and value.

I criticized this Cabinet for its lack of attention to raising revenues in my reply to the budget address. I advocated for one or more tax brackets for high income earners. I think that we can retain greater benefits...

Merci, Monsieur le President. Appointments to the Standing Committee on Social Development and Government Operations whereas Rule 9.2(3) requires that Members be appointed to Standing and Special Committees.

NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, second by the honourable Member for Thebacha, that the following Member be removed as an alternate on the Standing Committee on Social Development: Mr. Jackie Jacobson, the Member for Nunakput;

AND FURTHER, that the following Member be appointed to the Standing Committee on Social Development: Mr. Rocky Simpson, the Member for Hay River South;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the...

In favour.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. And I guess what I'm asking is that those two papers actually be added to the current engagement page, not buried somewhere else on the departmental website. But, you know, the engagement web page the way it has been set up is really biased in terms of extractivism. There's nothing on maximizing revenues to government, ensuring future generations benefit, or a consideration of environmental or socioeconomic trade offs. The next steps and guidelines are also vague, at best.

So can the Minister explain what the actual next steps...

Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. Of course, the only engagement that's happening is a web page where you can submit comments to an email address but, you know, the other fundamental flaw with the current review of mining royalties is the conflicting roles of her department in promoting and regulating mining at the same time.

Can the Minister explain why this review of mining royalties is being led by her department rather than an independent panel as was the case for the procurement review? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

In favour.

Merci, Monsieur le President. By the time this House reconvenes in May, the opportunity for public comments on the review of NWT mining royalties will have closed without much public debate or media coverage. Why is this important?

There has never been a comprehensive and independent review of mining royalties and the present process is fundamentally flawed, with literally billions of dollars of potential government revenues at stake.

I submitted eight pages of comments on a previous version of a research paper. It took two attempts to even get an acknowledgement and there has never been a...

In favour.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move that consideration of Tabled Document 56119(2): Main Estimates 20222023 be now concluded, and that Tabled Document 56119(2) be reported and recommended as ready for further consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill. Mahsi, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think you said $35 million. I think it should have been $335,239,000. Thanks.