Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak against this somewhat disrespectful, paternal and unilateral NDP proposal.
Before discussing this proposal, I would like to emphasize that our Conservative government has been a strong supporter of the Northwest Territories and all territories since taking office in 2006.
Indeed, federal support for territories under our Conservative government is at an all-time high. For the territories, this totals almost $3 billion in 2010-11, a significant increase of nearly $800 million since 2005-06 under the former Liberal government.
This long-term growing support helps ensure that territories have the resources required to provide essential public services, such as health care, post-secondary education, and other services that families depend upon.
We have done much more to benefit the north as part of our ambitious northern strategy. For instance, we created the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, headquartered in Iqaluit, with district offices located in Whitehorse and Yellowknife.
This landmark new regional development agency has a specific mandate to deliver federal programs specifically tailored to the needs of northern Canada. This is helping ensure a stronger more dynamic economy for northern families and businesses by directly empowering northern workers and businesses to take advantage of the resources and opportunities that exist in our own backyard.
I note that the creation of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency was very well received in the north. For instance, the Northwest Territories Chamber of Commerce applauded the move by stating:
This is a huge step forward that will place us on an equal footing with the rest of the country.
Regrettably, the NDP member for Western Arctic voted against this landmark development. This followed his equally stunning opposition to increased tax relief for his constituents, when he voted against increasing the northern residents deduction. Little wonder more and more northerners are becoming more and more disillusioned with the NDP.
For many, this was cemented with the NDP's decision to ignore and punish northerners by rescuing the flawed long gun registry. Today's paternal proposal will only further contribute to that disappointment with the NDP among northerners.
Let me be clear from the outset, what the NDP is proposing here is an outmoded and paternalistic approach to federal-territorial relations that is more characteristic of a long ago era. For what the NDP would do with today's proposal is unilaterally have the federal Parliament in distant Ottawa impose a new borrowing limit framework on the Northwest Territories through a private member's bill.
The NDP would do this with absolutely no consultation with, and no input from, the territorial government itself. The member did mention to me just before this speech that he has since spoken with someone, however, to my knowledge, I cannot confirm that.
This is no way to address federal-territorial issues. This is not consistent with modern federal-territorial relations. More importantly, this is not consistent with our Conservative government's collaborative approach to federal-territorial relations.
We have worked and will work in partnership with our territorial partners when addressing issues that directly impact them, such as borrowing limits. Indeed, in a concrete demonstration of that, last year our Conservative government actually initiated a joint review of borrowing limits with the territorial governments.
As I mentioned, this review is underway and, unlike this flawed NDP proposal, we are focusing on the borrowing limits of all three territories, not just one territory in isolation.
I find it troubling and bizarre, frankly, for the NDP to suggest that Yukon and Nunavut be excluded for a review of territorial borrowing limits. To endorse this questionable NDP proposal would toss aside this joint, collaborative effort for a unilateral approach imposed by the federal Parliament in Ottawa.
I would hope all parliamentarians would have more respect for Canada's territories than to endorse such a dismissive course of action. I ask parliamentarians to respect the ongoing review. Respect and allow the collaborative and positive work with all three territorial governments to continue. Not surprisingly, there has been exceedingly little support in the north for the NDP's proposal since it was unveiled last year.
I note and underline for parliamentarians that the Northwest Territories government has refused to lend its support for it. Even more damning, many other regional politicians are publicly questioning the NDP's unilateral action here.
I want to share with this Parliament in Ottawa what MLAs in the Northwest Territories are actually saying about this NDP proposal word for word, as reported in their Hansard of last November.
First, I ask you to listen to Dave Mackenzie, MLA for Kam Lake. He said:
--I’m surprised that our Member of Parliament for the Western Arctic is down in Ottawa trumpeting Bill C-530...The residents of this Territory would like to know who gave him his marching orders or, Mr. Speaker, is he marching to the beat of his own drummer?...To my knowledge, our government has never talked about a percentage of expenditures as a debt limit. The federal government is currently analyzing and reviewing the debt limits of all three northern territories. Please, let’s let them do that work.
Here are the words of Robert Hawkins, MLA for Yellowknife Centre:
Who had given the Member of Parliament marching orders to act on our behalf?...Who has he talked to in this particular government? My concern is, of course, he has not talked to me and I’ve looked around and only heard of one person he has specifically spoken to, and I’m not sure if that was any more than water-cooler talk at the time.
Finally, listen to what the NWT's own finance minister, Michael Miltenberger, had to say:
--we have indicated to the Member of Parliament for the Western Arctic that it’s his right to pursue a Private Member’s Bill...But we have made it clear that we have embarked upon a process with the federal Finance department and the other two territories to review our borrowing limit. That’s the process we’re engaged in. That’s the process we are committed to. That’s what we are paying attention to. That’s where we see the issues with our concern of the borrowing limit being addressed and it’s the one we’re fully engaged in...The Member of Parliament has a track that he’s on but we’re not involved in that.
Before concluding, I would like to take a few moments to delve in more detail into some of the NDP proposal's many shortcomings from the policy side.
Mainly, the proposal would set the NWT's borrowing limits at 70% of its estimated revenues for a given fiscal year, beyond which governor in council approval would be required.
This sounds simple enough, but there is one glaring problem: the NDP does not speak for the elected NWT government.
How do we know the NWT government actually supports a 70% limit? How do we know they do not support maintaining the current limit? Or, getting rid of the limit altogether?
Again, we have no idea as this made-in-Ottawa NDP proposal was concocted with no formal consultation with the NWT.
The member for Western Arctic's paternal and unilateral NDP approach to relations with NWT and the other territories is something Parliament must reject.
I ask Parliament to stand up for a more principled and appropriate approach on this issue by supporting the ongoing review being conducted collaboratively between the federal and territorial governments.