I am so. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, I'm saying that this government, we got two years left in our mandate. I don't know what this government is going to do with their Visa overdraft of $1.751 billion. Maybe they can look at putting more money into Jordan's Principle as an example, so that our kids are much needed that need their education. And, again, education is a treaty right. But, Mr. Speaker, it's really -- I gave the same speech back in March, and I'm here today again talking about the supplementary budget. Mr. Speaker, at this point in time I can't support the supplementary budget for those reasons. Thank you.
Thank you, Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. To the motion. Member from Monfwi.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister of Finance and this government for their hard work on these estimates. But, Mr. Speaker, I must be honest. Housing in the Tlicho region is in severe crisis, and I do not believe that this budget reflects the urgency that this issue deserves.
Families are living in conditions that no one in this country should have to live in.
Mr. Speaker, this government has said that improving the suitability, accessibility, and affordability of housing is one of its top priorities. I appreciate the 10 new houses allocated to the Tlicho region that's in Behchoko. But the housing needs across our communities are still far from being met. Almost every indicator shows that the Tlicho region is facing the worst housing conditions in the Northwest Territories. In Behchoko alone, there are more than 130 people on the housing waitlist. Over 37 percent of homes in the region needs major repairs, the highest rate in the territory. More than 21 percent of homes have had incidences of mold in the past year. Also the highest in the territory, Mr. Speaker. And over 25 percent of homes do not have enough space for the families living in them, which is more than twice as high as anywhere else in the territory. I don't hear a lot of other regions advocating for housing as much as I do in Tlicho region.
With the closure of nearby diamond mines approaching, it is expected that many Tlicho citizens will return to their home communities, placing even greater demand on already limited housing resources, Mr. Speaker.
The Tlicho region is also being left behind in other essential infrastructure, such as schools -- such as our schools. The school in Whati was originally built as an elementary school, but now accommodates students up to grade 12. It is overcrowded with limited space for students to learn and for teachers to do their work. This is unacceptable and needs immediate attention.
Mr. Speaker, community governments are not adequately funded to make improvements to their infrastructures. They end up waiting, or instead, they are left to compete for the leftover funds.
Mr. Speaker, the federal government, through the Indigenous and Northern Affairs, provides the Northwest Territories with $1.8 billion to support its subject or Crown subject, which are the Dene, Metis, and Inuit people. Yet, many of our small communities are still being left behind.
Mr. Speaker, I tried to look at the big picture optimistically, but from my perspective I see that Yellowknife and the larger regional communities continue to be the haves and the smaller communities are the have-nots. The smaller communities are going with what they have. And that is not right. That is not good.
The government, the GNWT's own statistics, Mr. Speaker, shows these problems clearly, yet they continue to ignore and neglect the small communities. This is not right, and it cannot continue. Every community, Mr. Speaker, needs safe housing, and every child needs a good school and a chance to grow.
Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, I cannot support Bill 36, Capital Estimates. Thank you.
Thank you, Member from Monfwi. To the motion. Member from the Sahtu.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We initiated the 20th Assembly with a focus on restoring fiscal balance. That was our directive, to basically and simply straighten out and strengthen our fiscal position. Our outside support, really, to some degree, in a large degree, dictates the balances and the strength of your finances because of the simple fact that we can't raise anything, we don't manufacture anything. You might make some eggs and some fuel tanks, but outside of that you're solely dependent on the third party formula funding that's coming in.
Then we moved on and addressed the devastations of subsidizing those devastations with funding revenues, the impacts of climate change and floods and fires and evacuation and so on. Those all add up into costs, unforeseen costs that we have seen in every region. One just has to look at the shoreline impacts in Tuktoyaktuk, the evacuation in our southern larger communities, the evacuations in Fort Good Hope. And the list goes on, Mr. Speaker, on added costs, added costs. It all adds up at the end of the day. And the difficult challenges I can see this government having is really trying to restore that balance and abiding by the fiscal policy which gives you an equity position for further infrastructure development. So that came up to two years, and now we're on the downhill slide, Mr. Speaker. As my colleague mentioned, it's actually a year and a half. We can shorten that by saying we only have two more budgets, then that's it.
So learning from Restoring Balance, so we're moving ahead. And I heard from the finance Minister's presentation here that it's now stability and resilience. Same focus as what federal counterparts are doing: Spend less, invest more.
Okay, surrounding my comments to the capital budget and knowing the fact and the situation of give and take and compromise and so on and our lesser position of raising capital, we cannot raise capital, limited amount, but by comparison to our provincial counterparts, we're so far beyond raising capital. It's not real, so. So given all that and given the fact that private contribution really helps restore the balance as well, so the cost of modular homes can be seen by reductions if we support that Fort Good Hope construction centre, which we are. In every year for the next five years, there's possibility it could produce 5 units. That's 25 homes. So let's look at the long run, invest now for tomorrow.
In today's financial position, yes, we've got to make compromise. And I think looking at the devastation and the cost and the operating income, the compromise is this budget. We can't satisfy everybody, Mr. Speaker. That's a given. So in summary, in short, I'll be supporting the budget. Thank you.
Thank you, Member the Sahtu. To the motion. Member from Frame Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I certainly don't have as colourful a speech as my colleague from Great Slave. I think that one is going to go down in history as one of the better alliterations I've heard on a budget, the outhouses to homes, or how she put it? I just have a few comments on this one, Mr. Speaker, and I am going to keep them quite brief.
The first one is that, you know, I put my comments on the record when we approved the mains last year about the housing funding that we were able to secure, that historic investment that came from the collaboration of Regular MLAs. And I think we really did achieve something there, and I put my comments on the record about it and I continue to be happy about it. So I had a feeling when this capital budget came forward, it'd be something I could support because that commitment was made. And, really, for me, it was first thing when we got it, I opened it up, had a look. Is the capital money there? Did they keep their promise? They did. At that point, the biggest issue that I could have raised was dealt with.
As I said during review in Committee of the Whole, you know, I do have concerns about our capacity to do these things. I do want to see departments collaborating where necessary to make sure that we can achieve this priority. I think that it's important to note that it is one of our top priorities, and so that's one of the reasons that I wanted us to put so much effort into ensuring that we made a difference. And I think we are making a difference. And I also want to acknowledge the comments by Members who don't feel like we've gone far enough. And I think it's just important to note that, you know, the housing deficit in this territory, if we really start to look at it as a whole, something along the lines of $2 billion. I think it's 19 -- or I can't remember the number off the top of my head, how many homes we're missing in order to be able to fulfill the need. But 900 different people on the waiting list; it's a huge problem. It's not something that we're going to solve with one capital budget. But I understand the sentiments of Members who don't feel like we've gone far enough. And I certainly -- you know, I've been to many of the communities that are in question here that are being spoken about, and I've seen it myself. I've seen the housing need firsthand. I've spoken to it in this House. I know the housing Minister has seen it in her community. She's seen it in many of the communities that she visits as Minister. And it's heartbreaking. It's devastating. And it's really difficult to see. And to be in a position like we're in and know that we can't necessarily meet that need, and that is the reason I fought so hard for us to get the little bit that we were able to get in there.
Something I do want to talk about a little bit is just our project estimating, capital project estimating, and despite the lessons that we've apparently learned, this remains a significant challenge for this government.
We saw projects in this budget from 2024-2025 to the 2026-2027 increase by 100 percent year over year. That's really nuts. And I was just looking at that one, just one of the projects, you know, in here, and the huge escalations that happened between that project first being estimated and coming to the point where we're building it now, and I'm very happy, a couple of Members have mentioned the Frank Channel Bridge. It's an essential project. We need to build that bridge. It's an essential transportation link. But the cost escalations have taken us to a point where it feels unsustainable to be spending that kind of money on a single piece of -- a fairly simple piece of infrastructure at the end of the day. And I look at that and I think about the infrastructure deficit in this territory, and it simply feels overwhelming. How on earth are we going to afford to build not just one but two highways if it's costing us $120 million to build a single bridge? The numbers in my mind are going well into the billions per road, and it just -- it's impossible to fathom how that kind of money is going to come forward without a significant and historic investment by the federal government as mentioned.
And I want to speak to that infrastructure deficit a little bit, just a thought that occurred to me a while back. I was on a trip down south and drove back into the territory. And I hadn't done that since I became an MLA, and of course you look at things a little bit differently when that lens is being applied. And I've felt this a number of times, but I felt it differently this time, just the feeling of crossing the border from Alberta into the Northwest Territories and noticing the subtle differences. You know, coming from Alberta, the road was very well maintained. It was clear that there was lots of money going into that road. You know, all the trimming on the side was kept up with. Immediately, as soon as I got into the NWT, you could just tell the infrastructure was suffering. The outhouses weren't quite as well maintained, some of them in pretty poor condition. The roadsides weren't as well taken care of. The road was full of bumps. And it's just very clear that we do not have the money to be maintaining the infrastructure we've got, let alone addressing the deficit. And I really think that this is an issue that Canada needs to be looking at. Why is there such a difference between Alberta and the NWT when you cross the border? Why is it that this part of Canada is being seen as different? And why is it a place that's considered -- well, I shouldn't say considered but it's a place that has become a have-not.
I'm not sure if I mentioned this in the House before, but another time that a significant difference stood out to me was I was working in a different job in a different life, and I had the opportunity to work on a cruise ship and we visited Greenland and a bunch of communities in Greenland, then we crossed the ocean over to the NWT side -- or sorry, the Nunavut side. And the differences in development between Greenland and Nunavut were just absolutely shocking and it really, really, really drove home the point for me, the difference between the money that is going into that country over there, just across the pond, and the money that is being spent on the North here. It was night and day. And I think, you know, it's something that stands out to me. It stood out to me in that moment as a Canadian. I remember thinking in that moment, I was like, I wish -- it was Justin Trudeau was the Prime Minister at the time, I wish he was on this boat. I wish he could see the difference. Why is Canada investing so differently in the North than Denmark is in Greenland? It was a stark difference. And, you know, that difference stands out to me. So I think -- when I think about how overwhelming the infrastructure deficit feels when I drive into the territory as a decision-maker, it certainly gives me a lot of pause. And I think it's something that as a country needs to be addressed.
As for the capital budget itself, as I said, I'm in support of this one. I think that the big achievement for AOC in this round was the housing. We got that in our negotiation on the mains, and Cabinet, to their credit, made good on their promise and put it in this budget. It's not enough. I acknowledge that. We all know that. But it was progress, and it was significant progress compared to the commitments that were in place before. And I have spoken in the past of celebrating small wins. I continue to feel that that incremental progress towards positive change is how we make change effectively in this role. I'm happy with the progress that we made, and I commit to fighting for more. Those are my comments on the budget, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. To the motion. Member from Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have to admit that my least favourite budget to deliberate is the capital budget. It seems to have the effect of dividing us into separate communities and regions, all vying with each other to get a greater share of a limited pot. My ideal, and likely naive vision, is that we would all be thinking about the good of all residents across the entire Northwest Territories and that as a group, we would try to prioritize the projects that meet the most urgent and greatest needs wherever they may be. But, naturally, each of us feels an obligation to fight for the communities and regions we represent, and most communities feel there's just so much more that could be built or renovated in their communities.
So when we got together, each Member pointed out how upset they were that such a tiny percentage of the capital budget was going to projects in the communities they represent. And contrary to popular assumption, it turns out the rest wasn't all going to Yellowknife. In fact, the capital is also getting a much smaller percentage of the capital budget than our share of the population would justify. So if most of the capital money isn't flowing into any of our communities, where is it going? The answer, we discovered, is that the bulk of our capital spending doesn't go into any of our communities; it's going towards highways and power infrastructure. And even then, we're not even coming close to allocating the money that we should if we actually wanted to properly maintain those assets. So that's depressing.
I do believe strongly in asset management, Mr. Speaker, as I spoke about in my Member's statement last week, that we need to focus on taking proper care of what we have before we commit ourselves to building shiny new things, especially big things like highways that will gobble up more and more and more of our capital budget going forward and offer even fewer opportunities to enhance the things within our communities.
Now, I also want to acknowledge that, of course, highways are useful. I'm not anti-highway. And we often just take them for granted without even thinking about the cost. But highways are not a panacea. They should not be assumed to be the solution to all of our problems, especially when they clearly create new challenges.
So, Mr. Speaker, it is my appreciation for asset management that makes me pleased to see that the government has recently committed $420,000 to assessments for schools across the territory. This is a really positive direction that will hopefully help focus our decision-making in future capital budgets towards the areas of greatest need.
I also want to acknowledge the continuing strong commitment to housing. As we have heard many times this week, adequate housing is the key to everything else, whether it's safety, health, economic development, you name it. So if there's any investment that's worth going into debt for, it's housing.
Mr. Speaker, I support the things in this capital budget. It represents many urgent and necessary improvements. I still feel that we can go further in terms of prioritization of capital needs and ensuring we use our limited resources to have the greatest impact. But that is a work in progress, and it will take political will from all of us in this room. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Yellowknife North. To the motion. Member from Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I appreciate the opportunity to say a few comments. I am going to focus on one particular area of the budget, but first I want to talk about budgets in general.
So we're not here to talk about the operations budget, and let's be clear, we're not. But there's only two times a year the Members collectively have the ability to have some type of influence on needs and outcomes. So how do we know what a perfect budget is? Whether it's the capital or operations -- and, again, the capital is the one before us, and it's usually the one that reflects us or feels like it reflects our needs and the messages we send. So whether we see that in operations or capital, it's the same issue, and it's the same argument. But when you're a Member, as the public doesn't necessarily appreciate, they don't -- they just view, well, why don't you just get what you ask for? And often you have to try to explain by the time we see the budget, whether it's capital or operations, it's almost 99 percent done. And from the days I started in 2003, there was a lot more detailed tos and fros of discussions about what capital initiatives are in there, why they're in there, and how we can get more things in our community ridings. So whether you're looking for an extra speedboat in the Sahtu, that's when they throw that on the table. Whether you're looking for that small bridge to get from, you know, the community of Gameti to Wekweeti, like, those little things, that's the conversation often what happens in those times. Now, those big projects don't happen overnight, but what happens, though, is they get earmarked for future projects. So obviously the bridge wouldn't show up that week, that next month, or next year, but what it would say is we agree with the planning, and we're committed to the overall strategy.
Mr. Speaker, the collective will of this side of the House typically represents 11 people versus the opposition of the Cabinet who proposes the budget of 7, and often the public says, well, you have the majority of votes. How come you can't get what you want?
But I often find that people misinterpret the values and hopes in consensus government without the practical realities of what actually happens. Many people run as politicians, and when they get here, most of these decisions often reveal more of a process of bureaucratic style. So political ambition is trumped by bureaucratic outcomes, and often I'll hear is, well, we do this because the public service told us this, and the reason this school is being fixed is because the public service has told us this is the evaluation. Long are the days of good old Gordon Wray by saying, we're going to work together, and what do you need for your town. And often we'd hear the stories of they would put arenas in communities and plan their recreations or even hear, well, water pump is in your community during the capital process is important; we're going to find a way to help have that happen. Now it's often I hear in my experience, being back for two years, I find it's, well, the public service has told us this is the direction we're going, and it's -- you know, the reason this road is being fixed is because the system itself has told us this is how it is. So it doesn't feel like politicians are being politicians anymore. And I don't mean it has to strictly be transactional. I mean, certain things need to be fixed. That's the truth. But often it's going to a community riding and saying, you know, what matters to your community? Shouldn't that be in the budget? And, you know, since I've been here, I've never really heard that message. I hear, well, here's the capital budget and there's a giant thump on the table of 800 and some pages -- and that's just more of a reference, Mr. Speaker, not a specific amount -- and that's the budget. And what's happening here is that people tend to miss the -- there's a loss of interpretation. I guess, really, I'm trying to say is that what ends up happening is it's like we're put in a room and said you guys figure it out. But we're really, at the end of the day, 11 individual parties if you think of it that way, jurisdictions, ridings, etcetera, whatever we want to call it; it's all semantics. But in essence, you're 11 individuals; it's very difficult to coalesce when you're 11, you know, whether you're in Tu Nedhe and saying, I want dust control. I'm just using this as an example. You're in the Deh Cho, and you say, well, I need this water thing fixed. And you're in the Sahtu, and I need that. So people are so focusing on individual ridings, it's almost impossible for a collective push to get an outcome on any of these budgets, whether operational or capital. So back to here's the opportunity.
The only time Members truly can wield any sort of collectiveness, and I say is that either something really bad happens, which I'm not obviously hoping for, because, I mean, that's not really the outcome I want. Truly, you may think I do, but I don't. Or there's something surges with this strange wheel of excitement that people can't stop the energy that's coming, they all want to be on board. And housing might have represented that in a lot of ways. I believe community housing needs to be stronger. And as a Yellowknife MLA, believe it or not, I strongly believe some of Yellowknife's housing not only -- I cannot be clear enough about this -- not only Yellowknife's housing will be solved, but it'll take pressure off the needs we have in our city by providing viable realistic options in the regions and in the communities.
Now, some people disagree, and I get it. I get it. They don't think that that's right. We should get more housing in Yellowknife. Yeah, we should. But we also have needs in the communities that will change that balance. So how do we get there? Well, we work through this.
The first plan as we see is being broached here which is this set of $50 million opportunity that we're going to see a wave of housing, I look forward to seeing it. And not trying to upset anybody when I say this next phrase, but, you know, I hope it doesn't turn into a debacle in ten years from now we look at with an auditor general's view of the problem and go, oh, where things went wrong. I hope we don't get there. I really don't. I sincerely hope that it rolls out in a relatively way. Not perfect. It's never going to be perfect, so let's get past that. Let's just hope it works and is effective and helps and serves people who need housing, you know. But do I see a reflection of me in the capital budget? Do I see a reflection of the Yellowknife Centre in the budget? And do I see a reflection of the community of Yellowknife? Things like that. And I think that's when Members start to ask, is this budget for me? Can I get behind this budget?
I'm not going to suggest in any way there isn't anything good in this budget, but I definitely know that this Cabinet, whether it's the Premier, the finance Minister, and everybody else, for goodness sakes -- I don't want to leave anyone out because I don't want anyone sad -- but the fact of the matter is this is our chance to ask for operational needs to be tied to the support for the capital budget. And, Mr. Speaker, you know this. Everybody knows this.
And so what would have mattered to me mostly is to see some push to fix the Avens problem. Now, I'm not going to go at length and explain that. We've already had a motion that's passed, and we've already had some details. And to me, I feel very sad that this budget could have said, okay, if your support on this capital budget is transactional, what you're asking for is -- and believe it, as they say, wait for it -- 0.00017 of the overall budget. That's all. It's that small because it matters that much to me.
Since I've been back, Mr. Speaker, I've had two phone calls from Ministers. I kind of feel lonely like the Maytag man. Nobody phones, right?
I had one Minister call because they thought there was a crisis. And I don't know why the other one called, although it was nice. But that said, no one asks me what I do -- want in the sense of through this process how -- I would have liked that. And they know that. And if I had heard that we were going to straighten out the Avens problem in some manner -- and, again, I'm not going to go at length -- I'd be behind this budget. And I think that that's really the fundamental reason why I feel frustrated with how it is. Whether it's concerns, as my good colleague from Tu Nedhe says, he doesn't see himself reflected in this budget. To me, that's how I felt I would have been reflected in this budget. And that's -- you know, sometimes needs are transactional in politics. It's that simple.
Mr. Speaker, if people haven't noticed yet or figured it out, I am going to end with this: This is so important to me, this particular initiative, as -- I am wrapping up. As I finish, this will not break Avens without that support, but I want to tell you this is going to put a lot of stress on that organization. And it causes me to look at every decision I have to make forward, whether it's this capital budget or the next operational budget or the following capital budget, etc. That this is important to me and the community. And so if anyone over there is listening -- I'm not suggesting they're not as in zero listening. But if anyone's listening, it'd be nice to hear a phone call saying, hey, we need your support for this. I'm listening on Avens. And that's the type of phone call I'd like to receive. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Yellowknife Centre. To the motion. Member from Range Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, you know, I've listened carefully to what the Minister of Finance spoke of in terms of working with a standing committee process, and I've listened to what the other Members have said both for and against the government -- sorry, the budget, rather, the capital budget, and I have some thoughts and some takeaways as well.
You know, the housing money is really seen, I think, by many Members as a centerpiece for this budget, and certainly for the last round of budget negotiations. My concern with this is we often get ahead of ourselves with ambitious capital plans -- the Member for Frame Lake mentioned this -- that we can't actually deliver on for a variety of reasons. Whether it's windmills or bridges or hospitals, it all seems that our procurement is challenged.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this housing money as well gives me additional concern in light of the auditor general's recent report. That was about homeownership programs largely, less about building. But if we build things, we can't officially get people into them, then they're not going to do us very much good. Furthermore, you know, saying 212 houses, homes, new homes, new builds, and the renovations we're going to get afterwards, it's a drop in the bucket to the actual need. The ambitious target that many Members, some Members, really stuck to was 500 homes. Not all Members. I think 500 homes is very reasonable. It's not Nunavut 3,000. It's 500. And we're delivering less than half. And when the need is exponentially greater than that, we should be shooting for the stars. And we're just not. And this budget continues to fail to do that. We don't need to settle for less when this is one of our four top priorities as a government, when this is a need, a crisis. The Standing Committee on Social Development just issued an excellent report with 44 recommendations that show us how deep and broad this chasm of housing crisis is. And I hope those recommendations are received by the House. But that's the kind of thing we need to see. Ambitious, far-reaching plans to transform systems, to build new assets, to invest in solutions. We're not getting what we need for housing even with the little bit we have and the little progress we've made.
I welcome the money for school assessments, to be sure. But in the Finance Minister's own words, these assessments are overdue. This is not new money that is a luxury. This is money that should have been provided before. These assessments should have been done before. Yellowknife school -- four Yellowknife schools are in desperate need of repair. Two need retrofits or full replacements. One missed its 40-year retrofit and probably needs a full replacement. And three have contaminated drinking water supplies. So I welcome the technical assessments, but I would much rather know those schools are safe for our kids. And this budget doesn't do that.
Mr. Speaker, as you know I'm passionate about economic development, and I issued a red alert earlier, trying to shake the government out of complacency. Online map staking is a key recommendation from industry that we need to get mining going again in the Northwest Territories, to restore our competitive edge, and actually compete with northern neighbours and remote jurisdictions. Critical minerals aren't forever. Lithium's not forever. The opportunity window will close on these things. The tax credits will end. If we don't have our systems in place now when the going is good, we may miss that window. And then, as some Members have said, all we'll have left is government. And that's not sustainable. So when I hear MARS will be expedited with no detail, what does that mean to anyone listening? A commitment is great. Politicians make commitments all the time. But if there's no tangible outcomes attached to that commitment, how do you hold it to account? How do you know it's going to happen? How can you turn back and say, well, you said you were going to do this, but you haven't? At any point in the future, before 2027-2028, when MARS is supposed to be implemented, the Minister can say, I am working to expedite. We are expediting it. But unless I have a schedule that shows how that process is going to go, unless I know there's new money put behind solving the problems there, unless there's an MOU on the table or a draft shared with committee behind the scenes of how they're going to work with the IGCS to make that happen, it's just words. And if I am going to support the budget and want to see MARS expedited, I need more than words. We need to see tangibles.
Mr. Speaker, I asked questions during the Committee of the Whole on this budget about the Ingraham Trail. Unfortunately and very sadly, one of my constituents was killed in a motorcycle accident this summer near or kilometer 21. I'm still unsure if that area of the highway will be repaired. I'm still unsure if guardrails will be installed. The Minister has committed to bringing that back, and I look forward to that information. I just don't have it at my fingertips. And I'm very concerned about the safety of that highway. My constituents, who spend a lot of time there, are very concerned with that highway. And until I have certainty that that is, in fact, going to be addressed, I'm not sure the $2 million for the next two years is going to go far enough to do that. There's a lot of work that needs to be done on that road. And if one person dies, that's a reason to invest more resources.
Mr. Speaker, our fiscal strategy Restoring Balance, which Members have spoken about, was unilaterally imposed. It was announced. There was a document. We've spoken about it. Now it's been unilaterally re-imposed with new terms that we're still not sure about. Yes, we approved borrowing limits. Yes, we get briefed on this stuff in committee before it comes public. But we don't know what the bigger picture looks like. We don't know how much we're borrowing to invest, and we don't know what strategic investments are going to be made over the next coming years. We know the big projects, the major projects, the ones we want, the ones we're fighting for. But those projects, they need billions of dollars that aren't coming from this government, that will need to come from the federal government. There's stuff we have to be able to do here, though, to keep the lights on in the economy, quite frankly, and build towards something better. And our fiscal strategy is key in that. We need to see that going forward. We need to understand what it means, how it works, how we're going to hold it accountable, what metrics for success there are, and how, ultimately, we're going to make this government sustainable, because I'm not sure we're headed in that direction either.
Mr. Speaker, consensus decision-making is not just an exchange of two letters and a response that pleases the majority of Members. Consensus decision-making is making sure that everyone feels involved in the end product or the final outcome of a decision. And yes, it does mean that Members can say, this is my hill to die on and I refuse to move. And then the process needs to work around that. Now, it's slow, and it can be painful. But that's what it's supposed to be. But it is not a simple majority voting for something or deciding for something. It is taking the time to understand the needs of Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh, the needs of Monfwi, the needs of Yellowknife Members, the needs of every Member, and finding ways to include that. And it certainly takes more time than two letters.
And at the end of the day, accountability needs consequences. And I brought this up before, Mr. Speaker. But we talk about this all the time when we have various issues how do we make sure that government is being held to account? And if we always say, well, the budget's good enough, so let's go along with it because let's show we're working together. There reaches a point where we're always working together, and nothing's ever changing, and the people who entrusted us to be here don't see the accountability they expect us to bring with the job. And that's why it's important to be able to vote against things that you don't feel go far enough or address the moment that we're in, the biggest challenges we face. That's what accountability looks like.
Detractors can say, you know, it's a distraction, and we should always vote together, we should always be unanimous, that's what consensus government is. That's not what consensus government is. And if we can't have that level of accountability in here without it causing frictions, then we have a real problem in our democratic institutions. So when Members vote against things, it's not because they aren't being cooperative or productive; it's because their constituents need to be represented and the bigger picture for the territory needs to be represented as well, and if they don't see themselves in that picture then they have to speak up. You can't keep giving the same pass over and over again and expect anything to change. And unless we change how this system works, we're going to repeat the same mistakes that got us into this place in the first place, flat revenues, mounting debts, and very little economic development on the horizon. And once the dam bursts on that, this government will have to look at painful decisions from within that it is currently putting off. But that will not last forever if we don't have a robust plan for our future. And those diamond mines close soon, Mr. Speaker.
Ultimately, another thing I must be mindful of, we are all treaty people. When I hear the representatives who are -- sorry, the Members who are and represent the Tlicho and the Akaitcho people saying this doesn't suit their region or their regions, their people, and I think of my community of Yellowknife being on their shared traditional territory, I must listen to their concerns as well, I think, if it properly addresses the needs of those treaty partners. And I don't think they've met that charge; I certainly have heard that today. So for all those reasons, I can't support this budget -- I won't support this budget until we start seeing real plans that addresses the moment we're in. It's not just a housing crisis. It's an economic crisis. It's a health care crisis. Enough complacency. It's time to move forward with real risk-taking, with real leadership, not forwarding concerns onto multilateral -- sorry, the Council of Leaders, or forwarding things onto the Prime Minister's desk. This government needs to step up at those tables, have a clear vision, and fight for that vision, fight for Northerners, and make a difference when we spend money that people can actually feel in their everyday. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Range Lake. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. So the Member from -- sorry, the Finance Minister, do you wish to conclude debate?
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I just have a couple comments on process. I'm not going to get into anyone's views of who's -- Mr. Speaker, just a couple words on process. I think I'll leave it at that.
Mr. Speaker, I do agree with the comments just now. Consensus is not unanimity. That's not the point. Consensus is a process. It involves conversations and discussions and information sharing in this government. I can't speak for the 16th or 17th or 18th Assembly, but the 19th and the 20th Assembly, it's a process that begins over the course of many months, a lot of information sharing, discussions that aren't structured, that are not one-offs, that are not individualized, that are not backroom deals, that are not one-off deals. The way that we've been doing it here, myself and the chair of AOC, is to get together to collect the positions of Cabinet, to collect the positions of AOC as best as can be reflected, not unanimity. Cabinet isn't unanimity, Mr. Speaker, but it is a place where we at the end of the day do come forward and present with Cabinet solidarity. But the process of getting there is by far not one of expecting or demanding unanimity, and it's often a place of much voracious discussion. But we can get to a place where then the different Members of this House can sit down through the chair, through myself, after many months of review, to determine whether or not there is something that we can move forward on as a collective sufficient to reach a decision here culminating in today.
So, Mr. Speaker, I always accept, and frankly expect, that there will be people who vote against the budget, whether or not there are small projects or major projects in their ridings. And that's certainly their purview to do so. But, overall, Mr. Speaker, we do want to try to consistently do our best to look at what risks befall the territory, what fiscal capacity we have to reach them, and then to never give up on the fact that we have to continue to act as leaders to move forward, to advocate, to speak out, to go to the federal government, to work with Indigenous governments, so that at the end of the day the whole of the Northwest Territories will ultimately be continuing to move in a positive direction. There's quite a number of challenges, Mr. Speaker. One budget isn't going to fix them all, but one budget can start to fix some of the problems that we find, whether it's identifying the fact that we may need to look at our school assessments, whether it's identifying the fact that we need to look at, you know, having a major bridge, or whether it's continuing the work we're doing in housing. So, Mr. Speaker, we'll keep doing all that work that's across the territory, doing it in a way that, again, follows a process of analysis, of risk analysis. It's not always very dramatic but it is one that, having increased over the last few years, how we do that planning, to improve that planning, trying to be more evidence based about it and not simply be one by one by one so that we can get a handle on where we're going.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I'll conclude, and I would ask, please, for a recorded vote. Thank you.
The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Hay River North. The Member for Hay River South. The Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The Member for Nunakput. The Member for Sahtu. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Thebacha.
All those opposed, please stand.
The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. The Member for Yellowknife Centre. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Monfwi -- the Member for Range Lake, my apologies. The Member for Monfwi.
All those abstaining, please stand.
Results of the recorded vote: 12 in favour, 4 opposed, zero abstentions. The motion is carried. Bill 36 has had its third reading.
---Carried
Third reading of bills. Minister of Finance.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Hay River South, that Bill 37, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Operations Expenditures and Borrowing Authorization), No. 3, 2024-2025, be read for the third time. Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Hay River North. The Member for Hay River South. The Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The Member for Nunakput. The Member for Sahtu. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Thebacha.
Thank you. All those opposed, please stand.
The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. The Member for Yellowknife Centre. The Member for Range Lake.
All those abstaining, please stand. The results of the recorded vote: 13 in favour, 3 opposed, zero abstentions. The motion is carried. Bill 37 has had third reading.
---Carried
Third reading of bills. Minister of Finance.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Kam Lake that Bill 38, Supplementary Appropriation Act, (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2025-2026, be read for the third time. And, Mr. Speaker, I would request a recorded vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Hay River North. The Member for Hay River South. The Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The Member for Nunakput. The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. The Member for Sahtu. The Member for Yellowknife Centre. The Member for Range Lake. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Thebacha.
All those opposed, please stand. All those abstaining, please stand. The results of the recorded vote are 16 in favour, zero opposed, zero abstentions. The motion is carried. Bill 38 has had its third reading.
---Carried
Third reading of bills. Minister of Finance.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes that Bill 39, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Operations Expenditures), No. 2, 2025-2026, be read for the third time. And, Mr. Speaker, I would request a recorded vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Hay River North. The Member for Hay River sore. The Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The Member for Nunakput. The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. The Member for Sahtu. The Member for Yellowknife Centre. The Member for Range Lake. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Thebacha.
All those opposed, please stand. All those abstaining, please stand.
The results of the recorded vote, 16 in favour, zero opposed, zero abstentions. The motion is carried. Bill 39 has had third reading.
---Carried
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Orders of the day for Friday, October 31st, 2025, at 10 a.m.
Prayer or Reflection
Ministers' Statements
Members' Statements
Returns to Oral Questions
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery
Acknowledgements
Oral Questions
Written Questions
Returns to Written Questions
Written Question 21-20(1), Changes to Child and Youth Counselling Services
Replies to the Commissioner' s Address
Petitions
Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills
Reports of Standing and Special Committees
Tabling of Documents
Notices of Motion
Motions
Motion 65-20(1), Extended Adjournment of the House to February 4, 2026
Notices of Motion for First Reading of Bills
First Reading of Bills
Second Reading of Bills
-
Bill 34, Trespass to Property Act
-
Bill 35, Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment Act
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Committee Report 33-20(1), Standing Committee on Procedure and Privileges Report on the Review of Motion 56-20(1): Code of Conduct Referral to the Standing Committee on Procedure and Privilege
Report of Committee of the Whole
Third Reading of Bills
Orders of the Day
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Clerk. This House stands adjourned until Friday, October 31st, 2025, at 10 a.m.
---ADJOURNMENT
The House adjourned at 8:02 p.m.
.
