Kieron Testart

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I know for a fact that the clause or the arrangement with the P3 partner is very specific that the GNWT gets final say about what goes in there. We had jokes about, you know, it not being allowed to be a casino, for example. So the GNWT had a say over it. They could have made it clear that it needs to be health. But I'll say this: Can the Minister produce any evidence that this is actually saving money -- that this -- at the time, it is saving money competitively from leases? We've heard as much as 30 percent savings but there's no dollar figure. Can she...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to follow up on questions raised by the Member for Yellowknife North on the Stanton renewal project.

The auditor general maintains that the leasing -- the decision to lease the Legacy Building, it's not good value for money. Plain English. It's in excess of $70 million that wasn't part of the initial project to a building we own. Does the Minister agree with the auditor general, and can she tell us today that this was not good value for money as a decision? Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, has the department consulted with frontline health care workers and -- other frontline health care workers, practitioners, on this people strategy that's due this June? Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. My understanding was during the pandemic in particular but additional benefit -- or wage subsidies -- the labour market supplement in actual fact were negotiated to help support frontline workers. And that process occurred outside of the collective agreement, is that accurate? Thank you.

Thank you. So when we have things like labour market supplements or anything that falls kind of outside of collective agreement but represents additional pay or for nursing or incentives for nursing or doctors or any medical professionals, is that this activity as well; would they cover that? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the change and support it, just to be clear, but, Mr. Speaker, there are other people of groups that are similarly disadvantaged or similarly of minority status, including people with disabilities. The disabilities council has come out and made it clear that they do not think this is a good move to make for the community. So why can we not include other protected minority groups under the Constitution in the affirmative action policy -- or in the priority action policy? Thank you.

Thank you. So the increase then -- it sounds like the increase is solely due to the increased cost per ton, is that correct? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The carbon tax offsets have doubled in these estimates from the revised estimates. Can the Minister explain why that is. Thank you.

There's a lot of lakes over here. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I'd like to talk about the carbon tax offsets, the cost of living, the COLO, the cost of living tax credit.

The last budget process, there was a commitment to revenue neutral carbon pricing regime. We do not see detailed itemization on how this revenue's reallocated to be revenue neutral which is something that -- was a commitment last time. Why wasn't it -- why can't we find that in the main estimates, a revenue neutral carbon tax? Thank you.

Thank you. No, I appreciate that. Again, I think these are discussions we should be having, and I'm glad we're having them. Brainstorming's probably not what I'm interested in doing on the floor either, but I think we have enough room here to move forward and find ways to work at either the standing committee level or individually as a Member, so I will leave it for that. But thank you for the Minister and her witnesses' time. Nothing further.