Just prior to proceeding, I just want to remind honourable Members that -- and I indicated this last week -- the matter before you is the Police Services Agreement. Your own rules indicate that speeches in committee of the whole must be strictly relevant to the item or clause under consideration. I do not want to be restrictive of debate, but the matter of the inquiry itself, while it is referred to as an important item, is not necessarily relevant to the vote of the $1,153,000. It is up to the Ministers and committee Members to be aware of the particular rule. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With regard to the Police Services Agreement, are we, this government, the employers of the lawyers, of the RCMP, or are we not? I would think that as employing the RCMP that we would have a say in their conduct.

Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Chairman, the Government of the NWT is not the employer of the RCMP in the NWT.

Mr. Gargan.

Then what does the Police Services Agreement mean?

Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Chairman, I guess, in broad terms, the Police Services Agreement means that our government, along with the federal government, purchases the services of the RCMP to provide general policing in the NWT under certain conditions. We buy the service. We are the customer and we pay most of the bill, as a government.

Mr. Gargan.

What is the end result of that purchase for the government?

Mr. Patterson.

'I think what the Member is getting at is what control do we have over police services. I can tell the Member that, first of all, the policing agreement does allow the Minister of Justice to determine and approve priorities and goals for territorial policing. We set the goals and priorities and we also, through our daily working relationship with the RCMP, communicate with them about concerns that are expressed to us as a government about policing in the NWT and try to ensure that they are aware of and respond to public concerns.

Mr. Arvaluk.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Minister has I believe under the a 30-70 ratio funding then ask the federal cent of it will be stated that we pay most of the bills. formula funding agreement there is arrangement. Would the Minister government, of $1,153,000, that 30 per requested from the federal government?

Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Chairman, this amount requested in the supplementary estimate represents our 70 per cent share of these costs. The other 30 per cent will be provided by the Government of Canada through the Treasury Board.

Mr. Arvaluk.

Has the GNWT already submitted a request for 30 per cent?

Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Chairman, the federal government is advancing these additional moneys in recognition of the increased costs that have been experienced with policing in the NWT in the past year. They have committed to come up with their share.

Mr. Arvaluk.

Minister of Justice.

Mr. Chairman, I should explain that about half of this money is for a salary increase that was approved by the federal Treasury Board. So these are moneys we have had to pay. The other costs have to do with increased costs for such things as the cost of having members of the police attend court. That is because crime and prosecutions are up significantly over the previous year. If the amount was denied by the Assembly, I would have to take advice from the Minister of Finance, but I think it would put additional pressure on the RCMP budget and it could, and I am not trying to be threatening in any way, but it could force us to take action such as reducing costs in other areas. In fact. it would be a matter that would have to be dealt with by the Financial Management Board, but it would put serious

pressures on an already strained policing system in the NWT,