Debates of March 4, 2026 (day 88)

Thank you, Member from Yellowknife North. Notices of motion. Colleagues, recognizing the time, we will take a brief break.

---SHORT RECESS

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS electricity rates in the Northwest Territories are among the highest in Canada, reflecting the territory's remote geography, harsh climate, limited interconnection, reliance on diesel generation, high fuel transportation costs, and aging energy infrastructure;

AND WHEREAS residents and businesses across the Northwest Territories are experiencing an increasing number of power outages, due in part to the unique challenges of maintaining reliable electricity systems in remote northern conditions, including logistical constraints, diesel reliant micro grids, and extreme climate events that complicate infrastructure maintenance and heighten outage risk;

AND WHEREAS residents and businesses are facing persistent and often severe increases in electricity bills, thereby placing extraordinary pressure on households and businesses;

AND WHEREAS businesses across the Northwest Territories continue to be adversely affected by repeated outages, resulting in operational disruptions, inventory loss, equipment damage, and reduced economic confidence;

AND WHEREAS the transition to renewable and locally controlled energy systems is underway through programs such as the northern REACHE initiative but further investment is required to decrease diesel dependence, improve grid reliability, and reduce long-term electricity costs;

NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Member for Yellowknife Centre, that this Legislative Assembly calls upon the Government of the Northwest Territories to establish a contingency support fund to assist Northwest Territories businesses experiencing financial losses due to power outages, including compensation for verifiable outage-related losses and support for preventative measures such as surge protection and continuity planning;

AND FURTHER, that the Government of the Northwest Territories expand and revise existing electricity rate subsidies to mitigate the escalating cost of power for both residents and businesses, recognizing the disproportionately high cost of electricity in northern and remote communities;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the Government of the Northwest Territories direct the Minister responsible to work with utilities, Indigenous governments, and federal partners to create a territorial grid reliability and modernization investment plan to address upgrades to aging transmission and distribution infrastructure, and invest in renewable and alternative energy sources to reduce diesel use and long-term costs;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the Government of the Northwest Territories invest in emerging and proven technologies that reduce power costs, increase system efficiency, and improve grid reliability, including but not limited to community-scale battery energy storage systems and advanced artificial intelligence-based energy management solutions, to ensure sustainable, affordable, and resilient energy delivery for all residents;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the Government of the Northwest Territories take immediate action with new dedicated resources to ensure critical energy infrastructure is operational in all NWT communities, such as three phase power in the hamlet of Enterprise;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the Government of the Northwest Territories respond to this motion in 120 days.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Range Lake. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member from Range Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think I wouldn't be -- it wouldn't be wrong to say that the number one issue related to affordability in the Northwest Territories for MLAs is power, is the rates of power second closely only to the high -- or second behind the high cost of housing. Power rates are the highest in the country despite our abundant hydro resources. And as the motion mentioned, we have many unique challenges that create a perfect storm of an unaffordable electricity system and one where ratepayers are forced to shoulder the brunt of those costs, and those costs continue to escalate, Mr. Speaker.

On average, electricity averages 25 to 34 cents per kilowatt, roughly two to three times the national average of 12.9 kilowatts. Energy -- sorry, 9 to 11 percent of households spend 10 percent -- less than 10 percent of income on -- or sorry, are spending close to 10 percent of their income on energy costs whereas Canada is half that rate at 5.6 percent. Each proposed rate increase adds hundreds -- or adds a hundred to $200 per month per household. On average, NWT customers experience 7.7 outages a year compared to 3.1 nationally, with 10 hours per customer annually for those outages. Most communities rely on diesel-based generation, which is extremely costly. The NWT grid is isolated from the North American system that amplifies the volatility and the outage risk of our power systems.

Despite spending $138 million in energy projects from 2018 to 2022 and a $12 million annual subsidy from 2024 to 2028, which is proposed to stay intact, the rates remain high and reliability continues to decline. We need to do something more than what we're doing, is the message here with this motion. And when I hear constituents come to me and say why is my power bill spiking even though I am doing what I can to conserve power, I am keeping the lights off, I am going on vacation and making sure that nothing's going on in my home, especially over the cold winter months. And yet the bills they get are the highest they receive in the year, and sometimes double what they were paying the month before. And those things just don't make sense to people. And when they come to us for answers, all we -- the only answers we get back is we already provide subsidies, we already do whatever we can to keep those rates low. But the rates are just too high, Mr. Speaker.

High electricity costs strain family budgets worsening overall costs of living in the Northwest Territories. Frequent outages disrupt heat, cooking, and daily life during often extreme cold months. Residents often pay full bills despite -- well, always pay full bills if they pay them -- interrupted service, which is a hidden tax on households. What are we paying for? I hear all the time. Why can't we get a reimbursement from the power corporation or from the utilities company because the power is just not reliable; what service are we paying for?

A family in my riding, as I've mentioned multiple times in this chamber, lost a home due to a power outage that fried electrical equipment leading to an electrical fire which, to this day, has kept them from their home.

Mr. Speaker, those surges and brownouts damage equipment, in particular kitchen equipment and point of service systems. These outages for businesses have an estimated cost of $4.7 million in lost GDP per day, Mr. Speaker. In the South Slave, a hand games tournament lost $5,000 on food due to a prolonged outage with no backup refrigeration. And those are costs that -- those tournaments and events are supposed to raise money for the community not cost money because of an unreliable power system. We've had shows at the Northern Arts and Community Centre cancelled because of power outages. We've had festivals interrupted because of power outages. It contributes to an impact on the cultural fabric of our communities as well.

Fort Smith's swimming pool, out of service for months with an estimated repair cost of $50,000. These high operating costs reduce competitiveness, hinder industrial growth, and raise local prices. And the prices, again, Mr. Speaker, are already too high.

Not to mention the public safety concerns. When the power outage happened not too long ago and this Assembly's generators kicked in, the lights were off around Yellowknife. I drove home through many uncontrolled intersections because emergency services were scrambling to get out and keep people safe. But, again, that puts additional pressure on municipalities, especially in the city of Yellowknife, to provide those public safety services at unpredictable times. And there are real costs to public safety when you can't rely on power and backup systems.

In an emergency situation as well, where communication is critical. During the evacuation, if the power lines had failed or been cut by forest fires to Yellowknife, it would have been completely isolated, Mr. Speaker. And that includes from any emergency operations that were crucial to manage operations on the ground for the first responders who were there. It was a live issue, and there was no backup plan or resiliency.

Mr. Speaker, as I've said before, power outages are no longer inconveniences; they are serious financial drains and a direct threat to the safety of homeowners and the viability of businesses in the Northwest Territories.

From resident and business voices, we've heard folks in Nahanni Butte say grocery prices are increasing. On top of that power is increasing, it's just insane. From Ulukhaktok's mayor, it's hard enough already; any rise in costs that affects our community in a hard way. Norman Wells grocery store owner, we're going to have to raise costs just to help cover these power costs let alone all the lights. And from the Yellowknife Chamber of Commerce, it's a huge hike. The hike never ends. Small mom and pops are really going to suffer. Costs are going up, up. Can people continue to afford living here? For a lot of people that answer is no. A Whati resident said shouldn't be charged full price of power for a power supply that isn't working at full capacity. And an official from Fort Smith said costs borne by the taxpaying residents of Fort Smith in relation to outages that cause necessary repairs to municipal infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker, accountability is important here as well. We spend millions on subsidies and projects yet reliability continues to worsen and rates continue to rise. Subsidy programs that are currently in place are supposed to reduce costs for households but are not addressing systemic reliability issues nor are they keeping those costs manageable, Mr. Speaker. We remain far more expensive than other northern jurisdictions of Yukon or Nunavut despite similar climate and remoteness. And, Mr. Speaker, we need to set clear public reliability targets tied to subsidy spending, modernize our infrastructure to reduce brownouts and outages, and provide transparent reporting on progress and outcomes so you can see the value for money of both these subsidies and energy programs.

And, most importantly, we need to do more to support the everyday taxpayer, households, and families that need a reliable power system, especially in a cold climate, and of course our small businesses who already have to stretch very far to bring a profit and keep their doors open, which is becoming very difficult. If anyone's been paying attention to the news in this community, my community of Yellowknife, we're losing a lot of businesses, a lot of storefronts, because of those costs. The economy is changing, and those costs are getting higher.

Mr. Speaker, I've spoken many times about the concerns of my constituents. And another reason I wanted to bring this forward is to have the debate, to hear from Members on what we need to do, because when we do the normal back and forth in question period or emails to the Minister, or even have conversations with the utility company, the answer is always the same. Well, everything is working the way it should be and we're doing the best that we can. Well, that's just not good enough, not in 2026.

Mr. Speaker, this motion contemplates -- calls for several things, all of the things that have been wrapped up in this motion have been raised independently by multiple Members on the floor, just this sitting alone, whether it's battery backup systems, a contingency fund to support businesses, looking at power rates to -- the rate subsidy system to see how we can improve the cost of living and affordability concerns of residents. All these things -- oh, and of course -- sorry, the critical infrastructure needs of communities that are still recovering from natural disasters, like the hamlet of Enterprise. I was quite taken with the Member for Deh Cho's statement which is why it made its way into this motion as well. It's crucial that every community has reliable, safe power, Mr. Speaker. It is not an optional thing. It is not a luxury that we can just say is enjoyed in southern Canada and we just have to tough it out on the North. We need that here if we're to build an economy and a society for the contemporary period for 2026.

Mr. Speaker, the issue of subsidies in particular, I know is frustrating. No one wants to provide expensive subsidies to industries that are not offering at peak capacity, and power generation and distribution should be no exception to that. We are in a situation where there is no short-term relief to the affordability issues that northern families are going through and working people are going through. The costs are going to continue to rise until we start making those modernization and improvements to the actual infrastructure. And even when those are made, if they're financed the way they're traditionally financed those costs inevitably fall back onto ratepayers as well. So we do need to do more, and we need to do more to offer that short-term relief because where we're at today it is so difficult to, you know, pay for your groceries, pay your mortgage, pay your rent, pay your car bills, pay for your kids, pay for everything else you need to pay for and still have money to save for your future.

I think of the young people as well. I think of those young families as well who have -- we've seen all the new benefits with child care, with other federally supported programs that are making a difference but the reach just isn't impacting the North the way it is in other places because we have these structural challenges that are just leading to the North being unaffordable. And I can say this with confidence, I don't think -- I think all of us have heard the same thing from at least one of our constituents or one resident of the territory, I am thinking about leaving or I am already making plans to leave. And power is one of the things they cite.

So I expect Members will have different perspectives on this. Like I said, there are many -- this motion calls for many things and some of those things that are called for have been raised before, so it's -- it attempts to be kind of an omnibus idea to capture these ideas of how we need to change things.

I also want to say I know the Minister responsible for NTPC and energy policy is not ignorant to these things. In fact, she has been very vocal on explaining the structural and systemic challenges. And when we did have that outage, she was very communicative to me at least, and I am sure to other Members, on what was going on with the system as people struggled for answers and to understand how things were going. So this is not a situation where, you know, we have a head in the sand approach or grass is greener; this is something we are all very aware of. But it needs to take the same kind of priority that we are investing in other things. And when I look to -- even today, when I was looking at a list of federal supported programs, I see Saskatchewan's north to south grid is receiving a feasibility study in the amount of $18 million from the federal government, and that's specifically tied to economic development and growth in their territory. That's something we could be more ambitious about here. Yukon is exploring that option of connecting their -- to the continental grid in British Columbia. They have different challenges but we have our own challenges, but we're all dealing with the same remoteness and the same lack of connectivity. The difference is they pay a lot less than our residents do.

So when it comes to those solutions that we've talked about, I don't want to see those solutions cost ratepayers more. We need to find a different solution to finance these things, and we need to improve affordability in the short term while we start investing in the future.

And the clean design pilot project is something that I am personally quite supportive of, and I've seen some pretty impressive results from that. That is an AI-powered energy battery system that actually reduces brownouts, reduces blackouts, and optimizes diesel usage in remote communities and work sites and mine sites as well. And they are also being federally funded to explore how they can make their technology work in the high Arctic in the B2Gold project.

So there's a lot going on in this space in northern communities. We have the potential to turn that pilot into a bigger project for the entire Northwest Territories, and I think that's where our mind needs to be right now. We want to continue to invest in clean energy. We want to ensure that clean energy sources, where they are as reliable and effective and cost-effective as diesel and natural gas and other sources of energy, can replace them, lower those emissions. But at this point the most important thing is a reliable energy system and an affordable energy system. Everything else is a luxury. Those are the two core components that need to be the focus of any future strategy. And that's what this motion calls for, amongst other features. But it is essentially calling for the government to do more than we're currently doing and to show confidence -- to give confidence to Northerners that things are going to get better, both in the short term and the long term, because telling people whose pocketbooks are stretched so far that don't worry, affordability is coming, you just got to wait until 2030, 2040, or 2050, they're not going to wait. They're going to leave the territory before it can become affordable. And we can't afford that right now as a government. We can't afford a single person to leave. We want people to come here, to invest in the North, to grow the North, and we need to start working on the backbone of our economy and the backbone of our communities and that starts with reliable energy and affordable energy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And at the appropriate time, I will cede to a recorded vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Member from Range Lake. To the motion. To the motion. Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Both the Member for Range Lake and I, we worked and talked quite a great length about this particular motion. It's really reflective of the feelings of the people in the community. And I don't necessarily just mean Yellowknife. I mean everywhere. I mean, there's nowhere I travel and don't hear about the stresses of power. I mean, I was in Hay River last weekend for the day and I heard people complain about the power bills. And, Mr. Speaker, when you read online or you see the table in Parliament when they talk about an $850 power bill, using a round number, you know, they wonder how people could survive here.

You know, I have the benefit of previously serving on the Co-Op board, and I -- that's the now Lakeshore Co-Op here in Yellowknife. And I asked them -- because we often talked about the impacts of the unreliable, supposedly reliable power, and the impacts of it. They'd send me some costs. And I want to cite some of them that they talk about the local level. And just before I do that, they were quite excited that I was asking the Minister responsible for the power corp, you know, could we come up with a system that creates an assurance program. Because, frankly, when you invest, you know, not just tens of dollars, not hundreds of dollars, now we're talking thousands of dollars, and in some cases millions of dollars, into your infrastructure and the unreliability of the power constantly puts such significant demand that things are always breaking down. So who eats that? The consumer in their case. I mean, the Co-Op has nowhere to go.

So people complain well geez, the prices of milk are high or the prices are bad or, you know, too much, etcetera, etcetera. Well, it's because of things like the unreliability of the power. So here are some examples from the Yellowknife store, the Lakeshore. And don't worry, for our friends out at home, I've got a couple of examples from Hay River too.

Mr. Speaker, for example, the lighting system keeps getting hammered as the cycle of power is inconsistent, and they have spent the last few years over $100,000 in working with that problem. Their LED signage has been taking a beating, and that's only rolled in around just a meagre $40,000. Mr. Speaker, they're constantly restarting, updating, and repairing computers. Their servers, their security damage recently was up to $5,000. Their phone system, Mr. Speaker, when you're in trouble who are you going to call? Well, their phone system, their integrated system within the store, is four to five times a year it happens, including their paging sound system through - you know, through the store, that always has to be either addressed, reset, reprogrammed two to three times a year. What about their warming equipment? You know, when we walk down that aisle, whatever aisle it is, you know, you're looking for your deli stuff. Well, that goes down four to five times a year, again because of the style of power we have here, as in the interrupted style of power.

Well, let's get to some really interesting ones. Refrigeration system. The compressors, Mr. Speaker. It's cost the Co-Op over $20,000 per unit to replace. Computerized monitoring systems they've put in, $25,000, Mr. Speaker. The gas bar alone, for those sneaking in grabbing your pizza well, that pizza warmer costs between $1,500 to $2,000 every time they have to replace it, not to mention the hotdog roller. You know, the fuel dispenser, how many times do you see people frustrated by the sensitivity of the fact that the program on the fuel dispenser doesn't work, the programming unit, the touchpad. Well, that's because they get fried all the time so they become weekly issues because of the style of power we have; in other words, the style of inconsistency. And, again, the canopy.

So I did say I'd mention Hay River. I wouldn't want to leave Hay River out with no intentions of wanting to do that. Recently, they had to replace a refrigerator compressor. It was approximately just a minor $25,000.

Mr. Speaker, those are some of the costs impacted directly by one agency or one group of stores, Mr. Speaker. And the fact is, who eats those costs? Well, the organization which means at the end of the day, the customers. It's the same customers that pay the other power bills. I mean, cost of living, as my colleague from Range Lake has pointed out, is -- I yet to see a marker where they put up posts and say we've solved this problem or we've rolled this problem back. I think in the last -- since we've been elected in 2023, Mr. Speaker -- and I stand to be corrected, and I certainly welcome to be corrected. But the only thing I've seen roll back is the price of fuel because the carbon tax is removed. But outside of that and the federal intervention, I have not seen anything roll back.

Now, the government is subsidizing the power corp. I guarantee you if we had real competition producing power in town, you know, people would move on. That's what real competition is creating.

We need solutions. We need ways to approach this problem because it's almost like we're so stuck doing the same thing over and over again, any outside of -- thinking outside of the box is just completely dismissed.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the fact that they're putting in the battery system in your community first. I think that that's a program and an idea that, quite frankly, it appeared it had a lot of resistance at the beginning but thankfully it's now going online just in a few short weeks, and we'll see how that rolls out. I look forward to Yellowknife being another recipient of this option, including any other community that we can sort of make it the right fit. And I will certainly support the expansion in any community to ensure we have reliable power in all our communities.

Could we save money? Absolutely. The government could start with something simple. Help the bottom line by getting rid of the PUB. Just say thank you for your service. We'd like to wish you well. And then get rid of all franchise agreements. I mean, why would you have franchise agreements in the Northwest Territories? We have a birthright power. Everyone is in on the same page. We all need it. There's only really one provider. So if we want to save on the bottom line, the government should just take out that page that allows people to do franchise agreements and just end it now. I mean, why do you think what happened in Hay River happened? ATCO fought tooth and nail to keep that because the money just keeps rolling. So they -- my humble opinion is, Mr. Speaker, is they wanted pain and suffering through the legal process, make them pay and change their mind by taking them to court over and over and over again until they give up. Well, thank goodness the Town of Hay River didn't give up. I only wish the City of Yellowknife would follow their example but they just renewed their franchise agreement.

Mr. Speaker, we have to find ways to make power more reliable. We've talked about batteries, AI. You know, living on the dream that Taltson is going to save us. You know, if I am completely honest I mean, I think it's a great academic program. I worry it'll never come to fruition. I mean, they float $3 billion today. It could be $4 billion by 2034, 2035. Who knows. And I think ultimately the question is, in my humble opinion, it doesn't matter if it costs $3 billion, $4 billion, $100 billion. What really matters fundamentally, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that is there a customer that can pay for it that rationalizes that cost? Because I certainly hope that they just don't run the line and say we'll just add that to the ratepayers.

Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of things about this motion that are right, and there's a lot of things about this motion that are super right. I think that if the government wants to make any strides, it still has a year and a half, 579 days approximately. Don't surrender, don't give up. Look for meaningful change that affects the everyday family's bottom line. Because when I am knocking doors and talking to people and the first thing they ask is what are you doing to make my life easier, I yet to see any affordability solutions that have changed their mind. I mean, if the government, its idea of solving cost of living is buying somebody a house or rent subsidies and whatnot, but that's not the market. The market's out there. It's we've got to find base solutions rather than band-aid ones. And I think that's the fundamental problem here is that, stability of power and affordability, Mr. Speaker.

And just to finish up again, my colleague from Range Lake is right. Over and over and again it's worth repeating, is people are leaving because of affordability. And if this isn't the biggest red flag, I don't know what is. It's certainly one that we could ask ourselves. And we can deny that we can't get power from Alberta, which I think really is the question, is how do we do that. How do we link that together? How do we talk to Prime Minister Carney, like the Yukon does to northern BC? And legacy projects like that may be outside of our typical affordability but when you look at legacy initiatives, legacy infrastructure, and changing the narrative of the path of where we're going, it's things like that that will make the bottom line much more affordable for people over the longer haul.

So, Mr. Speaker, with that, I will be voting in favour of the motion. I mean, it would seem weird if I seconded it and don't vote in favour of it. But, Mr. Speaker, my colleague's already called for a recorded vote so I look forward to hearing more from many others and their perspectives. But we must crack this nut because people just can't wait any longer. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Yellowknife Centre. To the motion. Member from Frame Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the principle of this motion speaks to several things, namely, infrastructure investment and additional subsidies into the system.

I am supportive of the parts of the motion that speak to infrastructure investment, and I made a statement about that earlier this sitting already and have requested a briefing with the Minister of NTPC at standing committee to speak and learn about that initiative in detail, pressure her on the items that we think are important, and get moving on that project. I am happy to express support for the Minister here for the various efforts she is leading to modernize and stabilize our grid, as is encouraged by part of this motion. As I said already, Mr. Speaker, I spoke to that in a statement earlier this sitting.

Part of this motion also recommends adding new subsidies and supports to our system. I think it's important to note that our system is already heavily subsidized by necessity. Just this past year, Cabinet approved subsidies in the tens of millions to help stabilize rates and not shock the system due to the increases required to cover the costs of additional diesel generation we have been faced with due to drought. Mr. Speaker, if residents had to bear the full cost of delivering power in this territory themselves, we'd be in real trouble. So I think it is important to recognize that the power system, as it is, already involves heavy subsidy.

I appreciated and supported the subsidies Cabinet approved at that time, as I think they, I, and everyone in this government is concerned about cost of living in this territory and protecting residents from shockingly high year-over-year increases. Nobody can disagree with that. I support Cabinet considering further supports in the future, as need be, appropriately weighed against other priorities and expenses and balanced against them.

Mr. Speaker, it is really easy to stand up and promise things like new subsidies. Of course people would be happy to see more supports. Who wouldn't? Making promises is the easy part, especially when you don't have to cash the cheques. What is more difficult is finding the money to support those promises and balancing that against all of the other needs of this territory, including the very infrastructure investment this motion is also calling for. While subsidies can help reduce shocks and are necessary to ensure costs of living remains manageable in this territory, I think it also needs to be said that we can't subsidize our way out of this problem.

Where do you think the money is coming from for that? So in a system that is already subsidized by a government that is already in debt, I think we need to be careful about promising more. I am not interested in making promises I am not sure we can pay for and just saying it's on the government to figure that out.

Mr. Speaker, I've reached out to different people who I consider informed on this issue and asked them for ideas on how we can change the narrative that we are living in right now with regards to power. I respect those opinions. I shared some of them in the statement that I already made during this sitting. I am going to let that statement speak for itself. I shared a couple of ideas that are just getting floated around. A couple of Members have spoken to a few of them already, and I am happy to support idea generation. I am happy to support doing everything we can to address this issue, for sure, with the caveats aside that I've already stated.

Mr. Speaker, without changing legislation -- and I want to be clear I would be okay with changing legislation. I just don't think we can do it quickly -- the directives issued by the GNWT to the NTPC board and the NWT public utilities board is a way to address current issues of planning and reliability using the existing regulatory framework. Furthermore, I think it's important to emphasize that the work the Minister is doing with strategic infrastructure and the potential for federal funding is really key to getting at some of these long-term issues. The best way to improve reliability and maintain costs is with federal-funded infrastructure projects. If we can use federal funding to replace aging infrastructure and pay for new infrastructure such as grid-connected transmission line that customers do not have to pay for, then we can introduce time of use rates, incentives for customers to use cleaner electricity. Those are things that can help us reduce costs.

It's really worth noting that those infrastructure investments themselves would also be a subsidy because residents can't afford to sustain those investments with their power bills alone, so we need help. I am not denying that in any way.

So, really, we are talking about subsidy either way, whether it's through infrastructure investment or just handing money back to residents. But I think we should be really focusing our energy -- no pun intended, Mr. Speaker -- on using the little funding we have on stabilizing our infrastructure and making investments that will help us correct these issues in the long run. That's really where the value lies in my mind.

Mr. Speaker, I have spoken previously to my thoughts on motions and how they are being used by this Assembly. When used sparingly on key issues of collective resolve, I think they could have value as a tool; however, with the frequency at which they are coming forward I think they have been reduced to functionally operating not much differently than Member statements and questions. Members speak to their thoughts on the matter, and the government responds. I haven't seen much evidence to convince me that motions have been effective at achieving their aims. So to the principle of this motion, I already delivered a Member's statement and questions on items related to infrastructure investment which would help us stabilize rates, so I am fine to support that aspect of this motion as our rules and procedures require me to consider the principle of the motion itself when voting on them regardless of my thoughts on the tool. As the motion is non-binding, I am also okay with being clear what parts of it I am less comfortable with and allowing those comments to inform the government's response. With that, I will express support for the motion with noted caveats. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. To the motion. Member from Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, I do not support this motion because I do not think it provides any value added in our shared quest to lower the cost of power. The sponsor of the motion said that this was an attempt to create kind of an omnibus motion to try to address all of our power challenges at once. So within this grab bag, there are some sweeping recommendations that I do support but many of these are, in fact, already underway by the government and the public utilities board and NTPC, and there are also a few specific suggestions in the motion that I am afraid I cannot support. The only thing in this motion that would actually lower power rates is the proposal to further subsidize electricity rates.

So, first of all, my understanding is the government has already recently announced that it is further subsidizing electricity rates. And I firmly believe, similar to my colleague from Frame Lake, that we cannot subsidize our way out of our energy challenge. It is fiscally unsustainable.

I also don't support the idea that this government should take on the role of sort of an insurance provider to directly cover any losses associated with power outages. While that would be nice, it's not a role that any other government in Canada has taken on and there are, indeed, power outages in every other part of Canada and if those governments don't have deep enough pockets to compensate everyone for all losses associated with power outages, then I hardly think it would be responsible for us to take that on. There are steps that homeowners and businesses can take to protect themselves and their appliances from electricity surges and outages, and we can continue to raise more awareness about those opportunities.

So integrated power system planning is, indeed, necessary and urgent. That kind of idea is mentioned in this motion but fortunately the government has already directed the public utilities board to get this kind of integrated power system planning underway. Engagement has been started by the power corporation, by Naka, with support of the GNWT, to plan the future of electricity across the territory, including opportunities for renewable energy, sequencing and planning for infrastructure investments, exploring opportunities to reduce diesel reliance, how to keep power reliable and affordable. So these conversations are already well underway and the work is being done.

Now, the motion calls for us to adopt more technologies that will reduce costs at the same time as they increase grid reliability. I certainly support more integration of renewable energies and battery storage at the community level, and I think it's worth examining how we can provide more redundancy on the grid to avoid more power outages. But none of those things are going to lower costs in the short term or probably not even the medium term, and it doesn't help to pretend that they will.

All of those things will take a significant amount of investment. They will cost a lot of money, and there's no way around it. I know we're always hoping and counting on the fact that the federal government will come in and pay for all those things, so that means they're free, and -- but the reality is that the federal government is not going to pay for all or even most of the potential things that we would like to see in our energy system, in our power infrastructure. So we still will need to make tough choices as to which investments we should prioritize in our power system. I just don't think it helps to continue this myth that we can have it all for free and also our power rates are going to go down.

So if I have to be the one to stand up and be the unpopular person who breaks that truth to people, so be it.

I am sympathetic to the plight of people in Enterprise trying to rebuild their community, but I think it's important to point out that Enterprise did not have three-phase power before the fire, so this is not so much a bare minimum investment but instead it would be a huge new capital investment which Naka Power says is currently financially prohibited. So certainly that may be something for future discussion, but my understanding is that it does not represent simply restoring the community to the status quo from before the fire.

So in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I certainly support energy affordability and energy security; I just don't believe that this motion brings us any closer to getting there. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Yellowknife North. To the motion. Member from Great Slave.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do share the mover's concerns on cost of living and power infrastructure replacement. I appreciate the opportunity for the conversation that this motion provides. I also would like to echo the very thoughtful and very measured comments from my colleagues who just previously went before me.

I want very much for us not to be in the situation we find ourselves in, Mr. Speaker. Importantly, I would like all of us to have a hard conversation about what gets taken off the table to pay for impactful subsidies and mass improvement to our power infrastructure. I will remain consistent with my reply to the budget and ask wholeheartedly to all Members, what do you want to give up?

The Venn diagram of fast, cheap and good, you can only pick two, is always in my head every day, Mr. Speaker. I grew up in a house that found it very hard to pay the bills and to keep the lights and the heat on or to keep the house at all. I don't think a non-binding motion on government is strategic, and a hard path forward that we all need to walk together is to make decisions outside of this motion, Mr. Speaker, and I hope we all do. It's useful for a public conversation, but I don't find this to be a place to make strategic decision-making, and I don't find this a place to find the solutions that we are striving to get towards, so I will not be supporting this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Great Slave. To the motion. Member from Monfwi.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, NWT has younger population, not enough seniors. That's according to the statistics. Mr. Speaker, to keep young people in the NWT, we need to do more for them. We need to make NWT an affordable place to live and a good place to raise their families. But due to high cost of living, we are seeing more families moving south where they can afford to pay to accommodate family of six living in a townhouse less than $2,000. But because of the high cost of living, we are seeing more and more families -- not just families, it's also the seniors or the retirees, they are leaving the NWT where the cost is not as high as NWT. One bedroom in Edmonton costs $900 near post-secondary whereas here in the NWT, one bedroom costs $2,300. How can anybody make a living? How can a young person make a living? How can a young person save any money? And this is even more higher in small communities.

I have heard many times from families living in the small communities, two-income families are still struggling to make ends meet. They have to pay rent. They have to pay for their fuel. They have to pay for utilities. They have to pay for groceries, clothing, and etcetera. And you know, there's other subsidies, but that does not apply to them, to the young families. So that is not a good -- that's not good. It's not helping anybody. But for seniors, there's seniors' fuel subsidy program. But there's -- that's it. And a senior living in the rental units, yes, they get a subsidy but for seniors living in their own home, in a private accommodation or in -- they own their own home, what I've been hearing from them is that this money doesn't last long. They only have the money for a day or two because it's gone the next day. They have to make a choice of either to pay for groceries and/or to pay for their light bills. And in winter, that's when they see an increase in their light bills, especially in electricity where $600 to $1,500 a month. This is what the constituents are saying. So the money that seniors get, it's a fixed income, compared to people living on income support. Income support, everything is provided for them. So people -- even there are some people that are working, they are saying the same thing, we have to make a choice of either to buy food and/or to pay for rent, so -- or to pay for electricity. That's why I think this year alone I've seen and heard from many of my constituents where they are on the limiter. Their electricity got disconnected but they are on limiter. And those who have wood stove, there's no damage to their place. And so for these reasons, I will support this motion. Thank you.

To the motion. Member from the Sahtu.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do realize that the operating cost, living cost, is high in the smaller communities and throughout the whole territories for that matter. And for those reasons, this government is subsidizing various costs to make it more affordable. I see it daily in the communities that I represent.

So when I look at the wording of this motion, I totally agree with the intent of the motion but not in its written format. If I may just add a hypothetical question. Compensation for outage, does that mean that this government is going to be hit with a claim every time the power goes off? I need a new toaster, be it real or not.

I would recommend the mover and the seconder to withdraw the motion and really look at eligibility. I do realize -- and I was at the grocery store last year, I believe it was, when the Co-Op had to isolate the one wing and take all the products and move it to other appliances so I've seen it with my own eyes, Mr. Speaker, on the damages of outages. And I am willing to look at avenues for compensation providing it's eligible. These appliances go into the thousands of dollars. And, as we know, as residents living in our communities, outages is really frequent and can be lengthy during winter months. So the experience of outages and the cost associated with that outage is here. It's inevitable; however, this government stands behind the commercial businesses. We see that in the various SEED programs that we have.

So I support the idea of eligibility compensation. And I can't support the motion in its written format but I agree to the principles. Now, if we can redraft that to make it more justifiable for public compensation. Thank you.

Thank you, Member from Sahtu. To the motion. Member from Yellowknife South.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in case I forget later, let me just say at the outset, Cabinet, when we are given direction to abstain, we'll be abstaining today.

But, Mr. Speaker, first, I heard the mover of the motion make the point that this is an opportunity for some discussion and debate. I will talk about energy any time someone will let me. So I am mindful of my time, Mr. Speaker, and it's been a long day already, so I won't take the 20 minutes I hope, but I have a lot to say about energy. It is urgent that the entire territory be aware of the challenges of the energy systems that we have here. We, right now, Mr. Speaker, of course, have many communities who are on no grid whatsoever. We have multiple micro grids across this entire territory. We are not on the North American energy system. I think not enough Canadians, frankly, realize that 40 percent of this land mass is not on the North American energy grid. These three territories are isolated. They are isolated. They rely on diesel. Even where we have -- the hydro communities, even where we have the redundancy in the backup of some renewables, our backup is always diesel. So it puts us at such a disadvantage. It puts us at such a disadvantage when costs become volatile, as they will with what's happening in the world right now.

I am deeply concerned when I think about what's going to happen to gas prices. It is going to dramatically affect the three northern territories of Canada in a way that this country is, I suggest, not prepared for and not really thinking about right now. The three territories need to be thinking about it. But what options do we have?

Mr. Speaker, our major facilities, our major energy facilities, were built years ago. Taltson was originally built for Pine Point mine, an industrial consumer that could actually afford to pay for power rates. Snare was built originally for the Yellowknife Giant mine gold mine. And Bluefish was built originally for Miramar. That's who was funding our big energy projects. None of those projects are around today, and we are now left with what's left of that infrastructure. That's what's holding us together for the communities that have the good fortune to be on those systems.

So, Mr. Speaker, 100 percent agree it is a dire situation. I can't go back 20 years. I don't know what discussions were had in this House at that time. I don't know to what discussions -- or to what extent energy was at that time being put forward as a critical and crisis level thing that should have been dealt with. I can say, Mr. Speaker, that some of the energy systems that we have are overdue for being fixed, overdue for being overhauled, overdue for being looked at. And that puts us at a disadvantage because it means that now here we are with so many challenges and so many needs spread across the whole of the territory, and we're having to do everything all at once. But we do have to do everything all at once.

So, Mr. Speaker, with respect to some of the subsidies in the meanwhile that we do have in place, I do want the public to be aware of them. There's a lot that actually does get put into our energy system right now which, Mr. Speaker, that money comes from somewhere. We're either raising taxes, or we're cutting programs, or we're not doing something else. So every time we spend a dollar -- we don't print money in the Northwest Territories. We still have to maintain a budget. If we go into debt, that is still we have to pay for the debt. So there is a fine balance in here somewhere, Mr. Speaker. I can't just say we'll just spend more, just give more. It does not fix it. And I think one of the Members said it's a band-aid solution; it's not a base solution. And I totally agree with that. It is time to get to base solutions. Overdue, but we're doing our best.

So that folks are aware of just how much public dollars are already being spent: The 2030 Energy Strategy, between 2018-2025 invested over $207 million in energy initiatives to support reliability and affordability. Of these, there was about $16 million that went to cost-saving initiatives and -- which is a cumulative $67 million in energy savings for residents. So, again, a lot of the money that Arctic Energy Alliance puts forward, Mr. Speaker, is in areas of affordability, of energy efficiency. A lot of programs are programs to which the public can actually apply and businesses can apply, and I can't encourage people enough to go to that system and go to -- or rather, go to that organization and see if there's opportunities there for people. We have put in about $37 million over six years to support some of those programs. But, again, Mr. Speaker, a theme I want to start coming back to is the role that we can all play as leaders is to really raise, I would say, a collective voice about the urgency of the problem and to be right-headed and honest about the situation we find ourselves in because for a two-year period, we lost $17 million in funding from the federal government to these programs. And it went -- and we were told it went from funding energy efficiency programs over to funding heat pumps, which might work in some parts of the territory although Enercan's website itself says they don't work after minus 25 last time I checked. So, again, we need to be united and consistent and clear as leaders when we are speaking to colleagues in other parliamentary systems, colleagues within the federal government, anyone else we're having the opportunity at the conferences we might attend, at connections we might have, about what is the reality here that we are facing. And that was one of the realities. The work -- that's working because the money got put back in this year, quite relieved to say.

The GHD grant program was $10 million over six years, and public housing provides Housing NWT's energy management strategy to support clients in public housing. We have, of course, the territorial power support program. This means that everyone who is in a thermal community, so residents that are outside of Yellowknife, they have their power rates reduced down just to be at the Yellowknife rate. This was $8.8 million in 2024-2025. There is the GNWT's rate equalization program. This is designed to equalize power rates across the territory for Naka-supplied communities down to those compared in the NTPC-supplied communities. This is a smaller round. There's not as many, obviously, communities that need to come down outside of Yellowknife. It's only $.15 million for 2024-2025. Last but not least, there is the government electricity rates program, Mr. Speaker. And what this means is that the GNWT can in NTPC-supplied communities actually pay higher rates because it helps keep the rates down for residents. And that comes in at $6.9 million for 2024-2025, Mr. Speaker.

On top of that are the shocks that we have seen from low water. This -- and from the attempts to actually change the structures that we have. I know another one of the Members said this accurately, when we're paying for infrastructure, when utility pays for infrastructure, that has to be paid in one of two ways, and it is either the ratepayer themselves, which means they're paying even higher costs, which is simply not tenable for all of the reasons we've said, or it can fall to the government. And so, Mr. Speaker, we do have that when the Inuvik wind project had some capital cost increases. That came at $38 million. In 2024-2025, we announced yet another four-year subsidy program to deal with the low water impacts as well as the inflation coming out of COVID, $48 million over a four-year period, three-year period. And now, Mr. Speaker, again -- and this has already been referenced -- this is another 48 million -- or another $30 million is anticipated likely to continue to support the GRA program that we went through recently and the rising costs that are coming in.

Now, that brings me perhaps briefly to the PUB, Mr. Speaker. Having some sort of oversight and some sort of external oversight to power rates and power costs is standard, and it is a good thing in the sense that it gives everyone in the public some assurance that the rates and the expenditures that are utilized in a utility company are evaluated, are considered, they're tested, so that there's not excess put into that system and that when the expenses are put forward that those expenses are expenses that are justified.

Mr. Speaker, I will also say -- and I really do want to highlight that these are -- these are the subsidy-type programs. These are the monies that are being put in to keep rates down, to keep rates manageable. That's the today solution so that people aren't paying even more higher rates than what they were. The Yukon is facing a 30 percent rate hike coming up right away, and they have some significant challenges in their supply. They are unlikely to be able to supply the power needs over the coming years. So they have a double hit coming to them. Nunavut, I believe just today or recently put out a news article that they are $30 million in the hole because they don't collect all of their accounts owing, and that's after they provide significant subsidies on their fuel costs. So all three territories are in a tough place.

All three, though, Mr. Speaker, are working very hard, in my view, to try to truly change the narrative on power and are often speaking with one voice to the federal government at federal tables that I am at -- finance, infrastructure, energy and mines Ministers -- always and consistently raise with the federal government that they must see the three territories as different.

The history of infrastructure here, as I said, the three major infrastructure investments were built for the mining sector. They were not built as public infrastructure. They were not constructed the way power lines may have been strung across different parts of the country, the way power lines may have been opened up alongside, you know, railway routes and highway routes. We simply don't have that core foundation of infrastructure on which to build here in the North.

The federal government now seems to be changing things a little bit. There is the major projects office now. There is significant talk of investment in the North. The Arctic infrastructure fund is now starting to see itself roll out in a meaningful way, so we can direct some of our applications there. It's all good news, Mr. Speaker, but again, I will come back to what I said earlier. It is urgent that we all stand up as a territory and as a territory say to everyone out there that is listening that we're ready and that we want to be taken seriously, that we need to build this country north and not just east-west.

There is some really exciting work happening between both utilities, Naka and NTPC, working together in terms of the integrated power systems planning. I know one of my colleagues mentioned this one earlier. I want to highlight it. Again, could this have happened 10 years ago? In my view, yes. But we are here today, and we're making sure that it's happening now. This is an opportunity for us to actually get a meaningful handle on what this territory is going to look like going forward; what do we need to make sure that in 10 more years or 20 more years, our kids aren't standing in this room and asking who made what choices and who did what. We're going to keep the rates where we can today so people can manage, not to suggest that the rates aren't high. But we're going to plan for tomorrow, and that work is really exciting work. And it's also exciting because those utilities are working together, Mr. Speaker, coming together and putting out material so that the public can respond. I would encourage people to check this out. It is online now, and they are beginning those engagements. We really must get a handle on where this territory is going into the future and what kinds of ideas and options and opportunities there are and how we're going to find that balance between affordability, reliability, and sustainability. The three things don't always, one to the other, equal out. They can be challenging offsets between those three values.

But there's other things, Mr. Speaker, that have kicked around forever and are now finally being looked at. Community intermittent power renewable generation caps in the thermal communities, they've been capped on the amount of renewable power that they could generate. Those caps are too low. We need to move them up. We need to encourage communities to be using creative solutions. That's what dev is there for, so that they can raise those caps and allow communities to generate power in a renewable fashion. And at the same time, we need to then bring that into the system. So independent power producers and participants on net metering, let's figure out how we're going to manage these systems. If you're making your own power, how much are you going to pay? How much do you put into the system? They're not easy solutions, Mr. Speaker, but we cannot kick these questions down the line. Again, these are the questions we should be asking ourselves and focusing on as leaders of the territory.

And then figuring out to independent power producers, Mr. Speaker. There's not a policy for independent power producers. You can't actually be in a situation where, you know, small communities have to one by one sign on and come to some sort of an agreement when they develop interesting and innovative solutions. We need to make this streamlined. We need to make it easy. So, again, we can look back and I -- we don't typically in consensus government tend to say well, that government didn't do something. So, you know, Mr. Speaker, we can only say today this territorial government can do something.

Obviously the GNWT is the one that responds, Mr. Speaker but these challenges are whole of government challenges. Every elected Member has a constituency that they answer to. We have the public that we answer to. We have contacts. We have connections. We have people that we are in touch with and we have ability to access. We can all raise these issues. We can all speak to these challenges, whether it's with our own residents so that they understand, with businesses, with our community governments.

I will say just a couple more things on the big projects, Mr. Speaker.

Taltson is not a silver bullet but connecting our grids for 70 percent of this territory is huge. Connecting our grids in areas that there are now serious interests from major industry to pay for that is also huge. So it certainly is an important project, Mr. Speaker. But there's also -- we have recently signed the Nailii MOU -- this is with the Tlicho government -- to advance the Lac La Martre micro hydro opportunity there. This has been kicked around since 2009. That should come to this floor of this House, Mr. Speaker. It's important that that advance. Mr. Speaker, there is also -- look Deline at micro hydro. That should come to the floor of the House, and it should advance. There's opportunities for micro hydro in Lutselk'e. I would love to see that advance. It's been years that it's been sat around. We have all an opportunity to bring those issues forward, and I would certainly encourage hearing those ideas and opportunities here. They can make a real meaningful difference.

And beyond that, Mr. Speaker, you know, I think I will just conclude again with my last comment which is around the partnership opportunities. This territory has an ability to show Canada how to build big things better and differently, that we can do it in partnership with Indigenous governments, in partnership with the people whose lands the wires will traverse, who will be -- whose lands the generating capacity is on, and we have a chance here to show Canada, to show the world, that when you build the big things it doesn't have to be the way it was in the 60s or the 70s or even the 80s. So I would implore us all, as the federal government is looking at us, talking big dollars and looking at the MPO or the major projects office, we can all stand up and say that we're ready, that we're ready to be partners, that we're going to figure out how to be partners. And we're not going to fight over the pie, we're going to make the pie bigger, and we're going to make it strong, and we're going to bring it power. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Yellowknife South. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. The Member from Range Lake, do you wish to conclude debate.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you to the Members, most of the Members who spoke to the bill, especially those who said they would support it. And I want to give a special mention to the Minister of Finance who gave the response on behalf of the government.

I am not -- this is not a situation -- like, you'll note there's not a whereas clause that says whereas the government is not providing leadership on this file. You know, that's not in the motion because I don't think that's the case. There's areas that we -- of course, we are advocating for that are in the motion that maybe aren't being done right now, but they're suggestions on what could be done. But this is an area where I have confidence the Minister is aware of the problem and has plans to do it. And it is an opportunity to have the debate because that's what we're here to do, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there's also not a whereas clause that says the government has infinite resources and we can spend, like, whatever we want. Quite the contrary. It's about choices and about strategizing and about focusing on the things that matter most, Mr. Speaker. And, you know, we need a proposal before we give something up.

It's we -- in our consensus system, we elect a Cabinet. They're the ones who control the money, they're the ones who come up with the proposals, then we consider them. That's how it works. So we -- it's not our job, on this side, to spend -- to -- we approve the spending but we don't design the spending. So we need to see that come forward before we can have a robust discussion on what we're giving up. For Members who want to do that, that's fine, but first we need to see the spending proposal in the first place.

As to the contingency fund for business, I just want to point out that it does -- the clause specifically mentions establishing verifiable outage-related losses and support for preventative. But the idea is not an insurance policy that every time the power goes out, the government pays your costs. The idea is to have a contingency fund in place -- the Member for Yellowknife Centre spoke about this -- that has clear parameters. So something along the lines of after two hours, then people can make applications to the fund and receive a sum of money to replace lost equipment that has been verified as damaged due to a power outage or a brownout or something like that. That's what's contemplated here, not an insurance policy where the government pays out every time there's an outage. So I just want to clarify that point and hopefully that helps Members find support for it. And, you know, why that's important? We have more than double the rate of power outages in Canada. So, you know, yeah, maybe not everyone does this but that doesn't mean we shouldn't. In fact, we need to be responsive to what's going on in our system today, not responsive to what the trends are in the rest of Canada. Businesses are asking for more support, and that's what the motion is calling for. And, again, it's a reasonable -- it's not an insurance policy. It's a fund that can be tapped into because people are tapped out, and if we can help people where we suffer twice the rate of a national trend, that's a problem we need to solve, Mr. Speaker.

And, you know, on other things, I do agree. And, again, the motion doesn't contemplate infinite money. The motion contemplates a substantial investment in power, just like we have previously called for substantial investments in housing and other things like that. Every government runs on cost of living, on affordability. Every single one of us makes those commitments that we're going to prioritize that but it's so hard to actually deliver on that, and power is one place we can do that. I don't think it's strategic when it comes to motions that we're debating to ignore the concerns of our residents about the thing that contributes most to the challenges they face, which is paying their bills. I mean, it's entirely strategic to show people that we are listening and that we are using this chamber for debate. That is the point of this chamber, and it's the point of our consensus system, to have debates on the issues. And, in this case, I think it's very important to show -- to allow the government to say how they're meeting the moment when it comes to energy affordability and security. Like I said, I have confidence the Minister understands the problem, and many of the steps she's taken and the government's taken are the right steps and what the motion calls for. This is an opportunity to say we're already doing it, and we're going to do it even better. And I think her speech today to the motion was a great way to show that and showcase that for everyone who's listening. So I thank the Minister for that, and I thank this House for allowing motions like this to come forward so we can speak to that.

You know, we've had non-binding motions on foreign conflicts in this chamber as well, right, and that has nothing to do with -- people are passionate about things like that, for sure, but it doesn't change the lives of our constituents. And it certainly wasn't a waste of this House's time. So just on the issue of motions, we're here to debate, Mr. Speaker. We're not here to -- I don't know -- warm seats. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, and I agree 100 percent with the Minister when we said we need to have a united and clear voice, and a motion is the way to do that. And to say we are united in the need to solve this problem, we have a clear resolve to solve it together and in partnership with Indigenous governments, with municipal governments, with the private sector, with both sides of the House, that is what we need. We need to show the public we care. We need to show constituents we are listening. Because going back -- I mean, I've struggled to find a way to go back to people and say well, I heard what you had to say and here's what we're doing about it. Because at the end of the day, they're going to look at me and say so you're doing nothing? Because my bill's not going down. And I still don't have those solutions. But I don't think anyone does, and I don't think anyone could. And this motion isn't proposing magic. This isn't magical thinking. This motion is proposing to build on what we're already doing and maybe tweak it a little to provide more support specifically around these problems like power outages. So it is not pie-in-the-sky thinking. It is not, you know, magical realism. It is a grounded motion that's designed to address the needs that people care about most, which is their pocketbooks, which is, you know, keeping the lights on when they're cooking dinner for their kids, which sadly is interrupted quite frequently in the Northwest Territories.

And, again, I know this Minister cares. I know this Premier cares. I know everyone in this House cares. This is not a gotcha. This is a how do we have that united and clear voice going forward.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will say thank you to all the Members who are supporting this motion, for supporting this motion, and I encourage the House to stand in solidarity and send a united and clear message that this issue is a problem we are committed to solve, and we are going to solve it together. Because as the Minister said, many people are listening -- the federal government, other parties -- but most importantly Northerners are listening, and they want to hear that we are investing in the solutions that make their lives more affordable. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Member for Range Lake. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Mackenzie Delta. The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. The Member for Dehcho. The Member for Yellowknife Centre.

All those opposed, please stand.

The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Sahtu.

All those abstaining, please stand.

The Member for Thebacha. 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.

Thank you. All those in favour, eight. Opposed, three. Abstaining, seven. The motion is carried.

---Carried

Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the House Bill 45, Civil Forfeiture Act, to be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to Rule 8.2(3), Bill 45 is deemed to have first reading and is ready for second reading.

I now call the Committee of the Whole to order. What is the wish of committee? Member for Inuvik Boot Lake.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, committee wishes to consider Tabled Document 448-20(1), 2026-2027 Main Estimates, Department of Finance, with an intent to conclude. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Does the committee agree? Thank you, committee. We will proceed with a -- we will go on a short break and then proceed with the first item. Thank you.

---SHORT BREAK

Welcome back, committee. Committee, we have agreed to consider Tabled Document 448-20(1), 2026-2027 Main Estimates. We will consider the departmental totals for the Department of Finance which were previously deferred. We will then consider the borrowing plan for the government reporting entity and established borrowing limits for the Government of the Northwest Territories.

Does the Minister of Finance have any opening remarks.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have opening remarks today, Madam Chair, to support some of the discussions that we've been having over the last several weeks and want to thank Members for their thoughtful scrutiny and approach, as always, to this process.

The questions and the insights that we hear during the Committee of the Whole review of the budget is helpful not only in terms of how we discuss and negotiate ways to improve it but also as we go forward knowing where priorities lie into the next year.

Madam Chair, this year, one of the -- I do have a number of -- I have fairly lengthy remarks, Madam Chair. They are a number of things that have been discussed over the last while. So with that, this year in particular, Madam Chair, one of the consistent themes that was raised by Members is that Northerners expect real improvements in the services that they rely on. This includes, in particular health care, education, justice, and land administration. And so with the support of the MLAs, we are in a position now to respond even better to some of those priorities with measured but significant steps forward.

At present, the table of main estimates propose an increased investment in services of over $135 million, but in the course of deliberations with Members, the 2026 Main Estimates now will see additional investments of approximately $40 million that will help enhance vital services to programs for residents.

Firstly, we are strengthening supports for students with diverse learning needs. The GNWT is committing likely $30 million to implementing enhancements that will be identified through the inclusive schooling review. These dollars will support the expansion of specialized clinical services, including speech-language pathology and territorial-wide JK to 12 transition protocols which includes improved early literacy screening.

Funding will be brought forward through the 2026-2027 supplementary appropriation process to ensure that schools can begin these enhancements immediately. This is one of the largest single new investments in this -- that we are seeing now in this budget.

We also recognize the importance Members have placed on maintaining stability in early childhood programming, particularly at a time when the federal government's funding decisions remain uncertain in this space. So to ensure continuity for families and operators, the government is committing to maintaining programming and access even as we are still awaiting final federal funding decisions. We are still waiting for those decisions to conclude; however, we know and we are prepared to commit that this will require a significant funding commitment. Final adjustments will be brought forward either in Budget 2027 or, if necessary, through supplementary appropriation in order that early learning and child care programs remain reliable, sustainable, and responsive to Northerners.

Across health and social services systems, Madam Chair, we are advancing major reform work. Members have raised significant concerns through this last session about the transparency, the timeliness, the coordination of all of this work. It is clear we want to strengthen primary care across this territory. This is a shared commitment, Madam Chair, and I am pleased to say that several commitments are being made here to ensure that our system sees significant deliverables over the coming year.

By December of 2026, all primary care panels here in Yellowknife will be fully established to ensure that every resident has consistent team-based care supported by the release of the integrated primary and community health care framework and a roadmap by May-June of 2026. The implementation of that framework will be guided by regional implementation toolkits, and those toolkits will ensure that communities can adapt the model to their local needs and maintain consistent standards of care.

Further, health care practitioners assigned to these teams will be supported through a primary care workforce plan. This will ensure that we are showing what types of practitioners are required to support teams and what their roles will be within those teams to ensure cohesion and clarity as team-based care becomes the standard for primary care.

To support this transformation, the GNWT will work to fill all nurse practitioner vacancies within primary care teams in the next fiscal year. Moreover, GNWT will create additional nurse practitioner and community health care nurse positions in regions where chronic physician vacancies have left gaps. This will ensure that residents can depend on stable and well-staffed care teams. A supplementary appropriation will be brought forward in the May-June session to ensure that we have the financial resources for this initiative.

Investments in biomedical equipment and digital health tools that will strengthen access to small and remote communities and ensure functional telehealth connections in all health centres as well as enhanced diagnostic capacity and increased training for community wellness workers are also now being committed. These improvements will support real-time clinical advice to frontline teams and reduce unnecessary medical travel.

The medical travel case management initiative is already showing operational improvements. It is expected that this initiative will now move with presumptive permanency. This will be an adjustment that we will see in Budget 2027, and this reflects the importance of improving scheduling consistency, case management, and reducing avoidable repeat travel. These initiatives result from our budgeting negotiation process and one that allows us to build on the investments that were being proposed to even better strengthen our healthcare services, support patient navigation, modernize service delivery, and modernize service delivery in small and remote communities.

Members have also emphasized the need to prepare Northerners for the labour market and, again, we are pleased to respond. Work is underway to modernize adult education pathways, strengthen early literacy screening, and expand community-based training opportunities, as well as ensuring post-secondary programming aligns with workforce needs. We are committed to providing financial support to ensure that Aurora College launches both a bachelor of social work program and a bachelor of education program in the fall of 2027 with final cost estimates to be provided in the May-June session.

We will also ensure that all former CLC facilities are available to be transferred to Indigenous or community governments for the delivery of education and training programs at a subsidized rate with additional GNWT coverage of the associated O&M costs. This is a two-year program at present, but we have also committed to support these providers so that they can establish more sustainable financial plans.

We also understand the need to ensure economic certainty and regulatory clarity as key priorities and, again, have made commitments under the ongoing work to ensure that the Mineral Resources Act is brought into force and to improve tenure processes to encourage and coordinate federal engagement that reflects practical and action-oriented approach on all of our major projects that are coming up.

On that, Madam Chair, advancing strategic infrastructure, in partnership with Indigenous governments, is a central priority. Planning for the Mackenzie Valley Highway continues in collaboration with Indigenous partners with updated timelines that will be provided as project planning, environmental assessment work, and federal engagement progresses. Financial resources remain still at this time contingent on federal funding for the project, but we will bring forward a timeline in December that sets out a path for construction of the full route to begin by 2030. That includes phase 2.

At the same time, work is underway to finalize the routing decisions for both the Taltson transmission line and the Arctic economic security corridor. These will be informed by technical analysis and regulatory requirements as well as engagement ongoing with Indigenous governments. As this advances, the GNWT will provide committee with clear timelines, proposed routing options that reflect both environmental, cultural, and economic considerations.

The GNWT is also committed to supporting Indigenous-led economic development in the Beaufort Delta. To that end, ITI will work closely with the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation in order to support their interests in advancing the Mackenzie Delta LNG project from pre-feasibility towards full feasibility. Whether the project proceeds to further stages of course, or not, will involve potentially applications to the major projects office and depend very much on the IRC's direction, but we're committed to support them.

Housing and land administration continue to be critical issues for residents, and the Department of Environment and Climate Change and Housing Northwest Territories are taking steps to accelerate land tenure processing and support Indigenous-led housing initiatives as well as advancing collaborative approaches that will improve community access to land for housing and development. We will be taking specific measures to improve and make available housing options for seniors in Enterprise.

As well, Madam Chair, and with special mention for the advocacy towards this initiative, we will work with the Tlicho government to the establishment of a standalone Tlicho administrative region. We will do this in a manner that allows better reporting structures to reflect the services delivered in Tlicho communities. And, Madam Chair, I do want to emphasize that we will be working in partnership with the Tlicho government on this initiative and that -- and it's only for that reason, Madam Chair, that while I am hopeful that this will happen in the life of the Assembly. It is one that will be guided by that relationship.

In parallel, ECC will be creating a regional assessment coordinator position in Behchoko on a two-year term to support increased activity related to the Frank Channel Bridge, and Housing NWT will ensure that they have a services officer in Behchoko for at least two days a week every two day -- or at least two days of every two weeks so that even as we work towards an administrative region, we are ensuring that territorial services for residents in the Tlicho region are improving.

Finally, Members provided important feedback on strengthening community safety and justice services. The GNWT is advancing the evidence-based crisis response work within justice and health and social services but also by supporting improved RCMP presence in smaller communities and exploring ways to increase access to justice across the territory. And to that end, Madam Chair, we will provide overnight RCMP accommodations in both Gameti and Tsiigehtchic within this fiscal year and improve access to justice by ensuring that GSO are available for duty counsel coordination and telecommunications access for regional court days when the court party is not in all of our small communities.

Madam Chair, while not every request can necessarily be fully addressed in one fiscal cycle, these main estimates do reflect substantial progress on the priorities Members have identified as the 20th Assembly and for which we've all committed. The $30 million commitment to inclusive schooling is, indeed, one particular example of how Members' concerns have translated directly into an improved service. It is a commitment we make proudly and one we intend to implement collaboratively and transparently.

Madam Chair, the list of commitments is rather lengthy. As I indicated, we are prepared also to table a list, consolidated list, of the budget commitments to ensure clarity and transparency and accountability for the commitments made.

I want to again finish by thanking Members for their engagement, for their advocacy, and for their dedication. This consensus process does make our budgets better. As each of us focus on our departments and on the work done as Cabinet, it is a great assistance to sit and to hear the questions given in the Committee of the Whole and through session to ensure that our budgets best reflect the needs of all communities and regions. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Does the Minister wish to bring witnesses into the House?

No, Madam Chair.

Okay. Can the Minister go to the witness table. Does the committee agree to proceed to the detail contained in the tabled document?

Agreed.

Committee, we will now consider the Department of Finance. Please turn to the departmental summary found on page 157, with information items on page 158 to 159. Are there any questions? Seeing no further questions, committee, I will now call the departmental summary.

Finance, operations expenditures, total 2026-2027 Main Estimates, $354,984,000. Does the committee agree?

Agreed.

Thank you, committee. The borrowing plan is separate from the estimates but is required by the Financial Administration Act to be presented with the estimates.

Further, the borrowing outlined in the plan will be included in the subsequent Appropriation Act that is presented to the Assembly. Please turn to page xv and xvi to find the borrowing plan for the government reporting entity and establish borrowing limits for the Government of the Northwest Territories. Are there any questions?

Seeing no further questions, I will now call this page, borrowing plan for the government reporting entity and established borrowing limit for the Government of the Northwest Territories. The total considered borrowing is $1,888,051,000. Does the committee agree?

Agreed.

Thank you, committee. Does the committee agree that it has concluded the consideration of Tabled Document 448-20(1), 2026-2027 Main Estimates?