Item 5, oral questions. Supplementary, Mr. Gargan.

Thank you. I'd like to thank the Premier for that response but with regard to money being allocated at the community level, is she still referring to decentralization to the communities, as opposed to individual organizations outside of government receiving the money?

Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, it would be both. A Minister responsible for a certain department would try to project what would be requested and required for the year and then would make a decision based on what people are asking for and on the merits of the proposal that came in. It would be both, Mr. Speaker.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Arvaluk.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Premier. During the past year, communities have made requests for funding to assist with aboriginal languages projects to various departments. In most cases, they have been told there is no funding available. For example, I could use the Elvis Raddi workshop in Coral Harbour and the Baffin Regional board shortfall. After the quarterly allotment was changed to a monthly grant, they were looking for money to develop the Inuktitut curriculum for their schools. Can the Minister responsible for this funding explain how the government can tell communities that no funding is available, yet lapse more than $1 million?

Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, those are specific proposals that the honourable Member is talking about. It's very difficult for me to express an opinion on a proposal that I haven't seen. I may not be fully aware of why it was turned down. It could be for any reason. I beg forgiveness because I'm not aware of those specific proposals. If we could be a little more specific, I can get the answers. I haven't got it readily available. Thank you.

Supplementary, Mr. Arvaluk.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My specific question is, some of these proposals from different communities have been considered to be good, but the simple answer usually is, we would like to help you, you have a good proposal, but there is no money available within the government. I'm trying to be specific, Mr. Speaker, by asking why there was more than $1 million lapsed, yet we told them the proposals were good but the funding was not available. I'm trying to understand how you explain that to the communities?

Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, I don't mean to be disrespectful to the honourable Member, but it's very difficult to answer unless we know the specific proposal and why it was turned down. I can better respond if he could be more specific to a specific project. At this point it's difficult to respond to a broad question on some programs, some projects, because I wouldn't know that answer. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One more question, Mr. Arvaluk.

Mr. Speaker, then perhaps I could ask the Premier if she would review some of these proposals that were rejected previously and determine whether they would have been able to qualify under these lapsed funds which were returned to the Secretary of State. Would the Premier tell the House if these can be reviewed, see if they could be fitted into this funding that is already available?

Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to review any project again, if the Member can indicate exactly what that project is and the information required to seek out that specific area of concern which has been expressed here. Thank you.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Lewis.

(Translation) Thank you, I would like to speak in French. My question is to the Minister of Education and it concerns the funds for the official languages. With the federal funds there are limitations and very strict conditions. Is it possible that the money for the official languages was not used because the federal government imposed strict laws for utilizing these funds?

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish I had the ability to articulate issues in other languages like my honourable colleague. There are a number of factors in the way in which the financial resources are allocated. Among those factors the only way we could get an opportunity to manoeuvre funds around in the agreement -- and the Premier could clarify this even further -- is that there is a ten per cent allowance for us to move money from one project to another.

If we are to get that approval, we need the federal government's agreement. If they disagree we are unable to move that money. So, it makes it very difficult. Once we set an agreement at the beginning of the year, we have to get agreement from the federal government to manoeuvre the money around. They may not agree. They may agree on some projects, but not others. That's the way the agreement works and it makes it very difficult for us.

Supplementary, Mr. Lewis.

(Translation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think the problem is with the Government of the Northwest Territories. Has the government discussed changing the rules so we could use the money for the official languages?

Mr. Nerysoo.

Those are some of the issues we are going to be raising as part of the strategy and the direction that we want to take in the negotiations for a new agreement. Any advice that we can receive from Members as to how and what we can do in terms of allowing us to manoeuvre the dollars in future, will only be helping us in signing a new agreement. I want to say though, that the 1984 agreement -- which I was a party to and, in fact, was involved in negotiating -- allowed us a broader ability to move funds around rather than the one we have at this particular moment. They've narrowed down our ability to move money as we were previously allowed to do, without, necessarily, the consent of the federal government. The present agreement restricts our ability to manoeuvre the money and I appreciate the concern that the honourable Member has raised.