Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When the standing committee on finance reviewed Government Services' budget, simply put, we felt that we are paying too much money for things. We are paying too much money for computers, furniture and vehicles. It seems that the government consistently wants to buy the top of the line, and, in fact, the perception in the communities, rightly or wrongly, is that the standards for purchasing things are too high. We feel that government should be setting an example by putting up with less. The Government Leader said we have to put up with less, and we all should put up with less. We have to take a closer look at the kinds of standards we are setting when it comes to the supply of government furniture, when it comes
to computerization and a whole variety of services and purchases the government makes.
We do recognize that Government Services is the service department; however, nobody can abdicate their responsibilities in analyzing and looking at the kinds of standards and the kinds of buying, and the way in which we are doing things. It is our contention that Government Services is the department responsible for government buying, and their purchasing policy should be re-evaluated to see if, in fact, the current standards and qualities that we are purchasing are really required. Is it required to have top of the line furniture in some of the staff houses? Is it required to buy the best computers? Is it required to have vehicles that are, in our opinion, perhaps somewhat luxurious? It is these kinds of issues that we think have got to be addressed.
I am not sure it is acceptable that everybody needs a computer. I am not sure it is acceptable that we need top of the line computers. I think it was proven by some Members of the standing committee on finance that you can get the same results -- and I use computers as an example -- with buying a lesser quality computer.
I find it interesting that in Keewatin Region we are buying $20,000 or $30,000 vehicles, and the private sector is buying $10,000 vehicles. They do the same function. They have four wheels, an engine and doors. So I think that we have got to take a hard look at that. We feel that that is essential. It really should be the responsibility of Government Services to do that.
The other area of concern we had when we looked at the budget, and it was a large concern because there are large dollars involved, was fuel tank construction. There are enormous amounts of money with respect to this. For example, the fuel tank construction was totalling over six million dollars, and this was seriously questioned by Mr. Bernhardt, who is not here today, as to the justification and the kind of community consultation that took place with respect to it. There was some concern that perhaps this thing may have been, historically, politically driven, not necessarily a requirement in the community. However, we can debate that as we get on with the budget.
In Gjoa Haven, the relocation of the fuel tank construction totalling $5.2 million. We were told that it is driven solely at the community's request to move it outside of the community. In these difficult financial times -- and it has been there for this long -- can we really afford these kinds of luxuries at this particular time? We felt, at the time, that it was not as financially justified as it should be.
There was some concern expressed by our good friend, Mr. Zoe, who is not here, with respect to Snare Lake. It does not have the bulk fuel storage and it was in the plan for 1993-94; however, it was our understanding that it was in previous budgets. We would like the department to take a hard look at that.
The committee asked the Minister for more information on these two significant tank constructions in Coppermine and Gjoa Haven. We have received some information on that, and we asked for further justification on the expenditure, which we have received.
The committee will be recommending through motion and discussion on the budget that all vehicle purchasing and leasing be deferred until a plan is developed on general purchasing and a leasing strategy is in place and approved by the Assembly, reflecting the current fiscal realities. I find it somewhat ironic that we are buying people top of the line furniture, and yet some of our people in the communities do not have running water. To me, this is an appalling waste of money.
Cabinet must review all the government standards for purchasing and leasing of all goods and services to ensure there will be no spending where no fundamental needs exist. Clearly, there has to be a second look taken at purchasing by Government Services. We have to ask ourselves if we need it. Can we afford it'? Can we do without it'? It is our contention, in a number of cases, that that is exactly what we believe should happen. If we do not need it and cannot afford it, then we should do without it. Thank you.