Mr. Speaker, I am in a disagreeing mood today. Mr. Speaker, I am going to take a different position than Mr. Lewis on this particular matter. I want to make a comment with regard to a statement made by my colleague, Mr. Arngna'naaq a few days ago.

One of the problems which I had with the original budget speech which was made during this time, was what I consider to be an absence of direction of government in terms of the policy initiatives and the financial priorities that this government had. I understand, Mr. Speaker, that it is the government's responsibility to detail those priorities and those initiatives. It is always important that we get some idea from the government, particularly from the speech from the Throne, and I say from the Throne not out of disrespect for you at this particular moment. The Lieutenant Governor's message should always give at least some idea of the direction which the government wishes to take.

I think that at least on this particular case, there is this an absence as to what the priorities are, and what the initiatives are going to be. This is in fact the budget session. We cannot prorogue this particular session because it is the budget session leading to the 1993-94 budget. I am not clear yet, as to what priorities are in the minds of our government for the next year and leading up to the actual development of the main estimates. It seems we are trying to deal with the matter of capital in isolation of future expenditures. I do not think we can do that. I do not think that we can continue to build buildings or housing without recognizing the ongoing O & M costs to those structures. It is impossible for us to do that.

If education is a priority, then it should be clear that the capital is going to reflect that. If economic development is going to be a commitment of this government, then the policy should reflect that. For me to try to suggest or give the impression to the people of the Northwest Territories that these are not important inter-related expenditures, does not in fact reflect the truth. The fact is that they are closely inter-related and our business in the Senate policy that has been amended as a result of this government, our commitment to hire north and northern business is an important factor and a necessary policy instrument.

I think that there is an absence of that kind of statement from me. I do say this, and I agree with my colleague Mr. Lewis that on the matter of the capital plan the way it is now proposed, I agree with the idea of completing the capital plan early, because it does in fact allow the business community to get ready for the upcoming 1993-94 capital building season.

I still do want to ask the government to reflect upon the advantages and disadvantages, because what is interesting and this may be due to different transportation circumstances, is that the Yukon in fact has reversed its position. We initially follow the idea of the Yukon, that the capital is in the fall and the own O & M is in the spring. They have now changed that around because they found the two budgets, the main estimates in terms of O & M expenditures and capital fit together so importantly that they said, they could not dissociate the two. I think that in reflecting upon the procedures that we have now put in place, we should not forget as a government how important the O & M expenditures are to maintaining our capital infrastructure. I think it is absolutely crucial.

The other point that I wanted to make is this, I am not a member of the Standing Committee on Finance. I was not in on the standing committee meetings, but my colleague and the chairman of the Standing Committee of Finance know that despite my absence, I wrote letters informing my colleagues about some of the concerns I had with regard to the capital expenditures in my constituency and some of the concerns that I had with regard to the projects that had been proposed. I think that it is important for all Members to understand that we have every right to participate. There is no door right now that is shut, that says a Member cannot participate in the Standing Committee on Finance or for that matter the capital process that you implement in our communities. Participate in the community meetings, participate at the regional meetings, to develop priorities for your communities and regions that will reflect not only in the short term, not only this year but two years from now and three years from now, so that we have a sense of how are we going to spend our financial resources. They are not unlimited resource and as such we have to be prudent and responsible about what we spend, and how we spend it. As the government and as an assembly we must always acknowledge that it is truly one of our fundamental responsibilities in spending public money to be prudent and responsible.

I agree with my colleague Mr. Lewis about the idea of utilizing our surplus money. If the Members can recall the time that we were proposing to expend our surplus money, I was one of the few Members who got up on this side of the House and said "you should be concerned about how much money you spend." My colleague, the Minister of Finance, can recall even in the Standing Committee of Finance that I raised those concerns, but we spent our money anyway. This government has a surplus of dollars and the idea was to make sure it was available for a rainy day, so that we could have money to get us out of deficit situations. Yet here we are. At that time we had $18 million, and today we have a $79 million deficit, as a result of federal unwillingness to pay for programs which are responsibilities that they should have. I think at that time maybe people thought that I was a bit crazy because we were spending money in constituencies and appeasing our political friends who would support us, but the fact is that the responsibility of this House is far more than political appeasement, it is addressing the long term needs of our constituents. We always have to be aware of that, and if we do not then this very situation will continue to occur. We will have a deficit next year. To what extent we do not know. I ask my colleagues on to be prudent on capital expenditures and to be responsible, to look at the purpose of those capital expenditures.

I think that in many respects there are capital expenditures that we are making that private businesses can make, and that the community business development corporations can make. We as a government do not have to make those expenditures, we can lease from our development corporations, and from private enterprise, but I think if your intent is to somehow respond to some of the economic crises in the Northwest Territories, I would ask the government to consider those matters. I know my colleague, Mr. Todd, has been a strong component of economic development in the Northwest Territories, and I know that he has been very concerned, along with all my other colleagues, about this particular matter.

I also tell my other colleagues that I am not on the Standing Committee of Finance to look at the potential changes that you are proposing if you are suggesting that there is in fact a change in the procedural aspects. I think that one of the major problems that I have with the idea of having public hearings, is the idea that it changes the whole concept of our working relationship, because we can do that. If we do that, it does not allow for us to have discussions among members in this House about those issues that they think are important in their constituencies. As a result of that we will go to the very same type of budget development that now occurs in most other jurisdictions across the country, and that is that one person can really determine what is in that budget and that is the Minister of Finance. The government may in fact recommend the priorities from each department, but in the final analysis it is the Minister of Finance who brings forward his budget. It is his budget that reflects some concerns, but is not all of the concerns of the Cabinet. I make this point, that if the Cabinet is not involved then to what extent are the Members involved? The more open the process and the more ability that we have as Members to develop the capital plan to reflect the priorities of our communities, the better it is for us. Maybe there is a better way of improving the participation of Members.

I agree with my colleague Mr. Arngna'naaq, but I do not agree at this particular juncture that we should allow the public to be involved in the actual development directive to the Cabinet. I think that that is a mistake and I think that is the responsibility of each Member, but I agree with my colleague that all Members should be involved, either in the community process, or in the standing committee process, but they must be consulted and they must be involved. I just wanted to make those particular points because in my view there are significant changes in the process of budget development. It may be good at this particular time, but I still ask my colleagues to review whether or not there are advantages, and to consider why the Yukon made the changes that it did of going back to the old method of attaching both documents together. Like I said we are coming back in February. I am not sure yet what the motion may read, but we could be coming back with a budget address that is not really reflective of O & M and capital together. Recognizing these are priorities and political initiatives, leadership initiatives that are going to improve the economy and the well-being of people in our communities. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.