Kieron Testart

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This motion applies to much of the work of the standing committees of the Legislative Assembly. Oftentimes, the committee is put into a position of defending a government bill, and its role is rightfully to review that bill. Having access to some of the questions that the public wants to ask is crucial to ensure that we can clearly define the roles of the executive branch and the legislative branch and so those respective branches of government can operate effectively.

A plain language summary attached to the public consultations on bills such as this one would greatly...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Standing Committee on Government Operations concluded its review of Bill 42, An Act to Amend the Petroleum Products Tax Act; and Bill 43, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act on August 7, 2019 with a public clause-by-clause review held at the Legislative Assembly building.

The committee read their substantive report into the House yesterday. To commence its review of Bill 42 and Bill 43, the Standing Committee on Government Operations sent letters inviting input from an extensive list of stakeholders, including all municipal and Indigenous governments in the Northwest...

Thank you. In response to the questions from the honourable Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh, the Minister made comments to the effect that we would repeal the carbon tax if the federal government scrapped the approach.

I would like to ask the Minister why he is so certain. That sounds like a decision made for the next government, and we have had a whole sitting here where Ministers are telling us that some decisions are left to the next government. Why is the Minister so confident that the next government will scrap the carbon tax once it is in place? I don't know how he is able to make those kind...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a few other questions for the Minister. During this process and in previous communications the government has put out, there has been a claim that the federal government will control how carbon tax revenues are spent, or as the Minister said in his opening comments, "spend the carbon tax revenue as they see fit." Yet the federal government has a stated policy that every dollar raised from a province or territory will return back to the jurisdiction. Can the Minister or his witnesses provide me with a federal policy that contradicts the stated policy that all...

Mr. Chair, I move, to the extent it is possible before the dissolution of the 18th Assembly and for the public record, that the government provide a response to these recommendations, even of a preliminary nature, that committee may publicly disclose. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I move that this committee recommend that the Department of Finance undertake a comprehensive review and evaluation of its carbon tax approach, including public consultation, to be completed after the program is fully implemented in 2022. The purpose of the review is to determine the effectiveness of the program on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to assess its impacts on the NWT economy in order to develop program improvements. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Well, this is not just something that Members are getting pressure from now. It's something that Members have advocated for for four years, since we got elected, and to hear that it's going to be the next government's problem is a naked example of passing the buck to our successors. What can be done in this sitting to address these issues?

---Laughter

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In 2016, at the start of the 18th Assembly, the GNWT continued to acknowledge that there exists a gap between the core funding and needs of community governments. The government has set a target of nine years to close this gap, and here we are, four years later. MACA's 2018-2019 Business Plan says we're still nine years away from balancing this deficit.

The NWT Association of Municipalities identified a $40-million deficit in funding. In the attached report prepared by the Conference Board of Canada, which was included with their submission, it stated that closing the...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I listened intently to committee's report on this recommendation. I am just wondering -- well, I guess I can't wonder; this isn't question period. These things are best dealt with by way of statute. You can do anything in regulations, just about, if pursuant to the contents of the act. My concern here is that those regulations may be a long time coming, and they may not be as forthcoming as we may want.

I think that, as the committee noted, there needs to be some explanation given to people who are turned down. It would have been nice to see that coming forward in...

Point of order, Mr. Chair. I will just quote from our procedural text, Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, 6th edition. A question of privilege. This is 26(2).

A question of privilege, on the other hand, is a question partly of fact and partially of law, the law of contempt of Parliament, and it is a matter for the House to determine. The decision of the House on a question of privilege, like every other matter which the House has to decide, can only be elicited by a question put from the Chair by the Speaker, and resolved either in the affirmative or the negative, and the question is...