I would like to thank you first, Mr. Speaker, for giving me this opportunity to speak on Petition 3-12(2), as it was your error yesterday for not giving me the time. Mr. Speaker, I would like to use this time to make a few points on the petition. Presently the Wildlife Act does not permit the feeding of caribou or big game to dogs within the community. The community of Baker Lake is the only inland Inuit community in the Northwest Territories, with a population of approximately 1200 people, the majority of which are natives of the area.

There are three main uses of dogs in Baker Lake. Pet dogs are kept by some families, indoors and outdoors for various reasons. Racing dogs are bred for recreational purposes. Working dogs, which is the third use of dogs, are also bred for hunting and fishing. Some hunters are using dog teams to hunt and to fish, as it is very expensive to hunt by snowmobile. It costs approximately $32.20 to purchase 10 gallons of gas, plus $8.45 for one quart of oil. A snowmobile drive belt can be as high as $66.32 each. Therefore, a hunter going out for a day on a snowmobile will pay approximately $111. This does not include the price of food for the trip, which could be in the neighbourhood of $40 per person.

We, in Baker Lake, have no marine mammals to feed our dogs. The coastal communities have seals, walruses and whales to feed their dogs, but we have none of these in Baker Lake. All we have is caribou, musk-oxen and fish. Most dog team owners cannot afford to buy fishing nets or other gear needed to fish for their dogs; therefore the people of Baker Lake need to feed their dogs caribou meat. The Baker Lake Hunters and Trappers Association, on behalf of the community of Baker Lake, have therefore sent me a petition, asking me to have the present Wildlife Act, subsection 57(2), changed to be able to feed their dogs caribou meat and not break the law. I thereby submitted a petition yesterday signed by 103 residents of Baker Lake. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Arngna'naaq. Petitions. Petitions. Item 10, reports of standing and special committees. Reports of standing and special committees. Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The standing committee on finance is pleased to present its report on the review of the 1992-93 capital estimates. Good financial management should not be something we just talk about; it should be something we do. If we do not do something now, this government will be $38l million in debt by March 31,1995. More people will be homeless, uneducated and out of jobs. That is the bad news, and it is a sobering thought. The standing committee on finance wants the Legislative Assembly, the civil service and the public to clearly recognize this problem.

The good news is, we can change it. That is why we are here. Not just by talking about it but by taking responsible, results-oriented action. Our stakeholders, the public, investors, the federal government, to name just a few, want to see a well thought out recovery plan to turn this government around in these leaner times. Our stakeholders want to see a plan that will ensure that this government will be in a modest surplus position by March of 1995 and that more people will have homes, more people will be educated, and more people will be employed. And they, the stakeholders, the public, want to see what is planned to ensure the basic needs of our constituencies are met. They will, and should, hold us all accountable when they next vote.

---Applause

It is incumbent on the standing committee on finance to offer criticism to our colleagues in cabinet, provided that criticism is constructive and done professionally. If we are going to criticize, we must also offer possible solutions.

During the week of February 11, 1992, the committee expressed a number of serious concerns with the capital estimates in advance of the Minister of Finance's budget. This was done to give the government the opportunity to review our recommendations and determine an appropriate course of action. We are pleased that the cabinet responded to our concerns and demonstrated a will to work with the committee. Of course, some of the responses, Mr. Speaker, may not have gone far enough, in our opinion, but we respect the decisions, and these matters we will bring forth in the coming days when we address the budget. This report reflects these same concerns, and reflects the guiding principles of this committee; that is, the need for fairness and good value for public money.

Some of the major issues of concern include: the Department of Education's budget in many respects; public housing; the Departments of Economic Development and Tourism, and Transportation in general; specific matters in other departments and related matters of principle which we will deal with in the departmental reviews; a general lack of vigilance in spending; and the responsibility to ensure that the effects of balancing the budget are not placed on the backs of those people who are most in need.

---Applause

Mr. Speaker, it is important to remember that this budget is a creation of past and present governments. None of us can abdicate our responsibilities. Government should and must respect previous commitments which are still justified prior to proceeding with new initiatives.

---Applause

It is the committee's observation that departments tend to be activity-driven, not results-driven. There are numerous examples of this, but the most obvious is the Department of Education, which measures success by statistics with little reference to achievement. Current graduation statistics and comparative testing show quite the opposite. In order that we may make our decisions in light of all the facts, it is the committee's intention to incorporate results measures in future reports to the Legislative Assembly. This is consistent with the position of the previous standing committee on finance. All departments and agencies must be challenged to achieve more with less, not just do more.

Special Warrants Approval Process Needs Improvement

We also want to be assured that immediately after this capital budget is approved in the Assembly, the government does not issue many special warrants, as was past practice. This concern is, again, consistent with the previous standing committee on finance, who raised the use of special warrants, abusing the process and circumventing the Assembly.

---Applause

A method has to be determined to include the committee's involvement in the approval process of special warrants.

It is the committee's belief that developing a long-term strategy with respect to our financial obligations must be a priority. Long-term planning is essential to good government. It is essential that with future capital budgets, a multi-year plan be presented. When capital estimates come in front of the committee again in October, we will want to see a five-year plan.

---Applause

Cabinet should also consider doing a thorough evaluation of the capital management planning and allocation process. It is obvious to this committee that the current system is not working as well as it should. Finally, and I have said it many times, the committee does not want the burden of balancing the budget to fall on the backs of the people who are in most need...

---Applause

...the homeless, the unemployed, the uneducated in small communities and in large. In coming up with our recommendations the committee considered that if sacrifices must be made, they must come from areas of surplus and enhancements; things we might like to do but cannot really afford to do.

If we cannot afford it, maybe we should not be renting four boardrooms where two will do; maybe we should not be building large arenas when medium arenas are satisfactory; enhancing a park or paving a road, and the list goes on and on. If we cannot afford it, then do not buy it.

The standing committee on finance feels that there is a need for fundamental change in the way that the government does things. We want to be a part of the process, with the Legislative Assembly, to bring about this change for the benefit of all Northerners.

---Applause

It is obvious that a long-term action plan is essential if we are to determine what our short and long-term financial obligations are. This, in the committee's opinion, should be the priority. We are prepared to work with cabinet to achieve this. We propose that cabinet and ordinary Members of the Legislative Assembly undertake a one-week strategic planning workshop in order to develop a shared vision that we can all work toward. This is unprecedented in other Assemblies.

---Applause

We cannot continue to run this government without some indication of what our priorities are, how we are going to achieve them, who is going to get us there, and what it ultimately costs. The responsibility lies with all of us. The challenge is our ability to look beyond constituency interests and determine what is in the best interest of all Northerners.

---Applause

The standing committee on finance accepts this challenge and awaits your response. We must be part of a solution, not part of the problem.

---Applause

Mr. Speaker, the standing committee on finance respectfully submits a list of 52 recommendations for consideration of this Assembly. Specific concerns have also been identified in the departmental reviews which are part of this report.

Motion To Move Committee Report 3-12(2) To Committee Of The Whole, Carried

Mr. Speaker, that concludes the report and, therefore, I move that the report of the standing committee on finance be received and moved into committee of the whole for discussion, in conjunction with Bill 14. Thank you.

---Applause

Is there a seconder to the motion? Mr. Zoe. Your motion is in order. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

CR 3-12(2) will be put into committee of the whole today. Reports of standing and special committees. Item 11, reports of committees on the review of bills. Mr. Arngna'naaq.

Report Of The Standing Committee On Legislation On The Review Of Bill 8, Bill 10 And Bill 11

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to report to the Assembly that the standing committee on legislation has reviewed Bills 8, 10 and 11, and wishes to report that Bills 8, 10 and 11 are now ready for committee of the whole. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to Rule 66(3), Bills 8, 10 and 11 are ordered into committee of the whole. Reports of committees on the review of bills.

Item 12, tabling of documents.

Item 13, notices of motions.

Item 14, notices of motions for first reading of bills.

Item 15, motions. Item 16, first reading of bills. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to return to written questions.

The honourable Member is asking for unanimous consent to return to Item 6, written questions. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Proceed, Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Members.

Will the Government Leader provide to this House the amount paid for the present expertise of the chairmen for all boards, agencies and committees?

Will the Government Leader provide the following: 1) the rate of pay; 2) the daily rate of indemnity and daily allowances; and 3) the amounts paid for all chairpersons in 1991-92? Thank you.

Written questions. Written questions.

Return to Item 16, first reading of bills. First reading of bills.

Item 17, second reading of bills. Second reading of bills. Item 18, consideration in committee of the whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 9-12(2), Strength at Two Levels; Tabled Document 10-12(2), Reshaping Northern Government; Tabled Document 12-12(2), Plebiscite Direction; Bill 14, Appropriation Act, No. 1, 1992-93; and Committee Report 3-12(2), Review of the 1992-93 Capital Estimates, with Mr. Arvaluk in the chair.

This committee has come to order. Yesterday we were on Tabled Document 9-l2(2), page 18 of the Strength at Two Levels report. We will break for 15 minutes before we proceed. Thank you.

---SHORT RECESS

Tabled Document 9-12(2), "Strength At Two Levels"

The Chair recognizes a quorum. Once again, I would like to thank all the Members for being so prompt in returning to the House. The committee now resumes dealing with Tabled Document 9-12(2), Strength at Two Levels report, on page 18. Any comments on page 18? Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman On page 18 we talk about the amalgamation of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation and petroleum products. I have some concerns about that, as I have expressed in the past, and I would like to try and express them today. Power and fuel are two essential services that none of us can live without. The Northwest Territories Power Corporation is currently controlled in terms of the charges back through the Public Utilities Board. I have a kind of an uneasy feeling that we are putting two essential services under one umbrella, and yet when we did a review of government through the Strength at Two Levels report, we never really did a review of the NWT Power Corporation to determine if, in fact, it is being run as efficiently as has been suggested. I am not convinced, and I have spoken to Mr. Pollard on this, but I am not convinced that we should be amalgamating both these departments at this time until we get a better handle on the efficiency level of the current NWT Power Corporation.

One of the standing committee on finance's recommendations -- and maybe I am letting the cat out of the bag -- but one of the recommendations in the report is that we should fast-track the possibility of selling off, as has been suggested by the Minister of Finance, the NWT Power Corporation. So I have some concerns about the fact that we would be moving POL into that jurisdiction, and if we can get an agreement in this House, to fast-track -- if, as I say, we can get an agreement to fast-track the privatization of NWT Power, how that would affect the communities and the costs and the charge-back accordingly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Cournoyea.

Mr. Chairman, in looking at that recommendation, it is my understanding that this recommendation was a recommendation supported by the previous standing committee on finance. Before the purchasing of fuel is incorporated with the Power Corporation, we are embarking on a study to see just how viable all that is, so I would be prepared to probably offer the terms of reference on the study, and also keep you up to date on the study team, on how they feel it can be done. The decision has not been made to carry out that task because we do not have all the facts and all the figures and what it would mean. But I think some of the arguments that were previously made is that the Power Corporation is one of the largest purchasers of fuel, and the government for public housing, et cetera, and so in combining those there may be some cost savings; also in incorporating the storage tank facility that each group has.

So I would be prepared to provide the terms of reference on how we will be looking at this possibility of incorporation. In terms of fast-tracking the Power Corporation, I have not done an update at this point in time on rescheduling, on how we are going to do that. So as soon as we embark on that, I think it is part of the implementation, and it is not something that is decided, because I do not know if the Power Corporation, once we look at what to do, whether they really want it or not. So I will be prepared to pass those studies, as it goes on, to the Member.

Mr. Todd.

Thank you. I recognize that the previous standing committee on finance did recommend this; however, we have a new standing committee on finance, and it might want to take a different position. I guess that is the one point I want to make. Let me try again. I guess my concern would be, it seems to me these two essential services are ones that we all need, and a reflection of the charge-back is a reflection of the way in which they run -- the cost of producing the product, whether it is petroleum or whatever. It is my understanding, and somebody correct me if I am wrong, that a subsidization program is in place, particularly with the purchase of fuel, et cetera. I have some difficulty in understanding, if we put it into an independent power corporation, given that we require petroleum products almost 12 months of the year and it is an essential service, it seems to me that it is putting a tremendous amount of clout in one particular group of directors or one particular corporation. I am not sure that is in the best interests of the public and I am not sure it is in the best interest of the Eastern Arctic. Cost savings are important, and I do recognize that, and there is a way, perhaps, in which we could amalgamate bulk fuel purchasing; but I have not heard a convincing argument yet, especially in my northern health discussions, that the NWT Power Corporation is going to be able to run it any more efficiently or less efficiently than what it currently is.

Any Minister want to respond to that? Ms. Cournoyea.

I think that in everything we do, whether it is the Power Corporation or Health and Social Services, these questions should be answered as we go along. First of all, there is a study going on to see how that can be done and what has to be done before we even embark on trying to put those two tasks together, so that will be available. At this point in time, I do not even know whether, once we shake it out, the Power Corporation would even think that it is a good thing to do; so as we go along I can assure the honourable Member that, while we are looking to implementing and co-ordinating these tasks, the information will be brought forward as we go along, because we just do not know all the answers to those questions, and it is quite valid in what is being presented right now.

As Members may have noticed, our lobby is beautifully decorated today. The fine artwork that adorns the walls commemorates Canada's 125th birthday, according to some. An awards presentation for the Canada Day poster competition will be taking place in the lobby in just a few minutes. I would ask all Members to join me for this presentation; therefore, the committee will recess for a few minutes. The bells will ring to bring the committee back to order.

---SHORT RECESS

The committee will come to order. We are dealing with Tabled Document 9-12(2), Strength at Two Levels. Page 18. Mr. Todd.

Mr. Chairman, if you will give me a couple of minutes, I have lost my train of thought.

Mr. Lewis.

Thank you. Since the train has already left without Mr. Todd...

---Laughter

...I will jump on the back of it and indicate to this committee that if there was anything in this report that caught my eye immediately it was the fact that there was a proposal to have the Northwest Territories Power Corporation assume responsibility of the distribution of petroleum products.

I looked at the words carefully, and I wondered what was meant by distribution. We see the word "amalgamation" and so on, and then if you look at the exact word it just says "distribution." When I looked at this originally, I could see the Northwest Territories Power Corporation being a mammoth consumer of diesel oil. It would be a pretty monolithic and huge corporation if, in fact, it not only was responsible for the distribution of power but was responsible also for the distribution of all other fuels for the production of energy.

My background, Mr. Chairman, makes me very, very uneasy about monopolies, especially when you look at potential for the only really significant utility which could have a major implication for the development of our economy. We all know that if you are going to develop any kind of base beyond just very, very simple manufacturing, you really have to look to this kind of utility if you want to develop an industrial base of any kind, even a very modest one. This proposal to amalgamate POL with the Power Corporation bothers me at that level, simply putting it with a corporation under its current structure. It frightens me when I consider the possibility of the whole thing being privatized, because then you would really have the monopoly that gives me nightmares.

We all know, for example, that in half of our territory, the area in the Eastern Arctic, there is a complete dependence on diesel for the generation of power. Right now we have a system in place which provides a degree of protection for those people; and it is in our interest, in fact, to keep a corporate structure together as long as we can, and to make sure that the interests of those people who are highly dependent on diesel is protected.

I am always interested in hearing good solid arguments for doing something. Like my colleagues here, I do not want to put up false fences against something that will change things, advance us and improve things. I think that would be a terrible mistake. But when you see a development like this to which you really cannot judge any advantage -- when you look at the way it is being proposed, you try to figure out what is going to be gained if we are to go that route. For example, if now the corporation assumes this responsibility for purchasing power, I can see ways in which, perhaps, we could begin looking at developing ports in places, and identifying these great oil tankers on the sea somewhere and dragging them into some northern place and have them off-load their oil, and so on. There are all kinds of visions that you can have on how things could be different.

The major concern that all of us really have with this -- I will give just one example of something that is just a minor detail, perhaps, but currently if the government purchases oil and sells it, then we are somewhat exempt from different levies such as GST and so on. It does not affect us. If the corporation were to take it over and this was to be considered just another one of their purchases, then they would automatically have to pay those taxes.

Danger Of Huge Monopoly

My major concern, Mr. Chairman, is that I see a real danger in developing a monolith, some huge monopoly, which has tremendous potential for doing things which may not be in the interest of all the people of the Northwest Territories. In looking at this document, that is what we have to bear in mind; not what may help one little area or one little region, but what is best for all of the people of the Northwest Territories. There are some things here which do not give me the kind of satisfaction, if you like, that we would be serving all the best interests of all of the people in the Territories, if we were to put these two things together, and do it in such a way that there are no real advantages for everybody. Thank you.

Ms. Cournoyea.