Thank you. Mr. Minister, to the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This House unanimously supported the ratification of the Nunavut T.F.N. land claims. The 1993-94 capital project, the connection of the Iqaluit Museum to the Unikkaakvik Centre, represents the first effort that the department and this government are making to create a regional museum. These facilities will be Baffin depository for Nunavut artifacts currently stored in Yellowknife. It will be a centre from which materials can be shipped to Baffin communities to the heritage program there. There is an increased need to get on with the devolvement of a strong regional heritage program and to get the facilities in place well before other infrastructures initiatives commence. With the current facility program plan being three years old, it is expected that the work in 1993-94 will include a review, and updating of the program plan followed by architectural drawings. I would very strongly recommend that the connection between the existing Iqaluit Museum and the Unikkaakvik Centre be allowed to proceed so that it can be created as an air controlled facility. Thank you.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to sit down in my own chair so that I may be able to participate in the vote.

Proceed. To the motion. Mr. Lewis.

Mr. Chairman, I have sat in this House for a few years now and what is going on now is supposed to be what we are all about, which is consensus government. The very important part of the system is that we have standing committees. The standing committees pay a very important role. Sometimes they make mistakes like they did with me yesterday, but I forgive them when they do. However, this is not much different. The Minister was told it was deferred but he had better come up with substantiation as to why he wants it. The same kind of principles are going on here. We are not a rubber stamp Assembly.

---Applause

I think it is very important that we observe that principle. If our consensus system is going to go, we do not simply sit here to rubber stamp what Ministers want to do. I see this vote as not much different to what happened yesterday when the Minister came forward and said "you had better substantiate this better." For that reason I will be supporting this motion of the Standing Committee on Finance to delete.

---Applause

Thank you. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.

---Carried

Baffin, total region $500,000. Agreed?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Keewatin, total region $25,000. Mr. Dent.

Thank you. Before I rule on it, there will be copies circulated.

Thank you. Your motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Arngna'naaq.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be voting against this particular motion for two reasons. Firstly, because I am not a Member of the Standing Committee on Finance. As I said in my Member's Statement two days ago, if you are not a Member of the Cabinet or the Standing Committee on Finance, then you do not have a forum to defend your constituency until the budget in the Committee of the Whole.

This will be the second such occasion in this particular session where a Member is saying that they are not a Member of the standing committee. Otherwise, there would have been a different outcome to the recommendation. Yesterday Mr. Lewis stated he would have spoken out in the standing committee stage, however, he is not a Member of the Standing Committee on Finance. Again, this was pointed out in the Budget Address made by Mr. Nerysoo earlier today.

I am wondering at this time how many items there are which directly affect those Members who are in the standing committee whose items are being recommended for deletion. If there are any, then it is only with the approval of that particular Member that the recommendation came into this committee.

Secondly, this particular project was initiated by the community residents of Baker Lake. This project was not initiated by this government. This is a collective initiative on the part of the residents of Baker Lake, the Anglican Vestry, the Anglican Diocese and the Hamlet Council and they have been working on it for five years.

It was formulated by the Qatqamiut Historical Society, whose mandate was to restore the original site of the present community. They have received approval from the Anglican Vestry to restore the buildings in the area. They have worked with and received the blessing of the Anglican Bishop of the eastern Arctic. They have received approval from the Hamlet of Baker Lake. They have been able to access funds from various places and have come up with a complete 70 page study which shows the viability of the project. In fact, I have copies downstairs in my office. The study comprises a six-page program summary, the agreement between Qatqamiut Historical Society and the Saint Aidan's Anglican Church Vestry, a four page list of the inventory which the society has accumulated for other projects, a 13 page financial summary, copies of bids for this project, a 29 page sequence of events since the inception of the society, seven letters of support, including the federal government which is willing to provide $100,000 of financial support to the project. They have been able to create ten or more jobs in an area where the government has been unsuccessful or was successful only at great expense. This society has worked tirelessly and voluntarily, I might add, and it has hired 100% locally. These are people who have very limited skills or have traditional knowledge, unlike other organizations in the community.

When Members of this Legislature spoke so eloquently of the need for community initiated projects of northern and local hire, I agreed and I am still in agreement. But if this motion is carried as recommended, then I will not believe the true intent of policies made in this Legislature. I am telling each and every Member of this Assembly that this particular project is community driven, not government driven. I think that those communities, especially ones who already have a plan, should be left alone by the recommendation which the standing committee is making. What this is, is making the community suffer as a result of the government having to follow a directive from this Legislature.

The case has always been that whenever a community is ready and raring to go it is the government that holds up the process and this is exactly what the case will be. I will say again that when Members who are not of the Cabinet or the Standing Committee on Finance, they really have no say over the budget until it comes into Committee of the Whole. This is another perfect example of that statement. I ask this committee, especially those who are not Members of the Cabinet or the Standing Committee on Finance, to consider what I have said and to vote against this particular motion.

I would also like to point out a contradiction that is being made by this committee. Just a few minutes ago a motion was passed and you may have noticed I did not vote. The committee recommends that the Department of Education, Culture and Employment Programs develop a policy covering museums, churches and other historical buildings to ensure consistency, fairness and equity in the application of standards and criteria for such infrastructure between communities.

The community of Baker Lake is allotted $25,000 which is a very small amount compared to what you see in the Fort Smith Region, which again, this committee has just passed in the amount of $650,000. Now where is the fairness in this? I do not see where the fairness is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

---Applause

To the motion. Mr. Gargan. Order please. Order. To the motion. Ms. Mike.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Arngna'naaq may not realize that if this government develops policies and plans for museums and churches, he might end up with more than $25,000. We want something solid we can go by and live by. This is not to try to do you in. One of the Finance Committee's responsibilities is to make sure that our government is responsible for allocating funds properly and fairly. Thank you.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Gargan.

Mr. Chairman, we do not have a policy in place and even though I have written to the Finance Committee and the Chairman, they have not been able to address the issue themselves.

We do not have a policy in place to address issues that ordinary Members have. And I am sure that if there was a policy in place, I would have something for my own community but as long as I am left in a situation where I lobby the Minister, the Finance Committee, the ordinary Members, but nothing is in place to govern how the allocating of money should be given to communities on historical buildings, sites or museums, then the government as well as ordinary Members are at a loss.

I think we need some guidelines to govern how this is done. This does lose the anticipated allocations to historical buildings or sites. There is still money allocated in the future for those communities that we are looking at but as long as we do not have the measurement of fairness of allocations, then I cannot support something like this. The principle is to have something in place. I feel that I am betrayed; other communities are getting and I am not. I have done my fair share of work and the community has to raise its own money without relying on outside foundations.

So I feel I am treated unfairly but I still support the motion because we must have something in place to address historical buildings, museums, etc.

Thank you. To the motion. Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.

---Carried

Keewatin, total region zero. Agreed?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Kitikmeot, total region $200,000. Agreed?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Total contributions $1.632 million. Agreed?