That's a good question. I believe it would be the Minister of Finance.

Are we talking about recommendation number two, Mr. Chairman?

Recommendation three.

Three, I'm sorry. Normally, what we would do is have the audit evaluation people look at that situation and if it was judged there are some grounds for recovery, Justice would be brought into the situation and Justice would give us advice on what could be done or what couldn't be done. That's normally how it would go, Mr. Chairman.

I have one other question. I didn't fully hear the Minister of Finance's comments. Sometimes, it is hard to hear on this side. Mr. Chairman, if the government is going to review the payment of consulting fees to Mr. DeLury and assess the feasibility of recovering these fees, what is going to determine what is feasible in recovering the fees?

Mr. Chairman, what would happen is one of our auditors would look at the terms of reference, the contract, the fees paid, the services provided, et cetera, and then once they have ascertained what exactly happened in a financial contractual nature and if it was felt that some of the fees could be recovered, they would advise Justice. Justice would give the advice on whether in law the fees could be recovered and how those fees could be recovered, if they were recoverable. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

So, is it clear that these would be recovered from IRC as opposed to DeLury and Associates.

Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't want to comment on that without knowing exactly went on. I don't know who they might be recovered from. I think that goes back to the kind of arrangements that were made with the Government of the Northwest Territories. I guess we'd have to look to an expert to tell us if there were any recoveries who they'd be recoverable from. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I wonder if the Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs could answer this, since he was the Minister throughout the whole fiasco with this particular contract, Mr. Chairman.

To the motion, as indicated on page 11 of the report, Mr. Chairman, I am trying to get clarification on a motion before I vote on it. It states, on page 11, recovery of costs, "In May 1990, the contractor requested approval from the Minister to provide services on a short-term basis, to the IRC. Commencing the week of May 28, 1990, for a total of 69 hours (or $8,740 in costs) were reported as work done for the IRC, and these hours were included in the amounts invoiced and subsequently paid by the GNWT. The invoices indicated the hours that were applicable to the IRC, and contained a note, suggesting that these amounts could be charged back to the IRC. Based on the available documentation, it appears that these costs were not recovered from the IRC by the GNWT."

Mr. Chairman, I read that into the record because it certainly contradicts what the Minister has just indicated in this House. I guess what I am trying to determine is, when they do assess the feasibility of recovering these costs and who do they recover them from? Do they recover them from IRC or do they recover them from Mr. DeLury? That is what I am trying to determine. Thank you.

I recognize question is being called, Mr. Chairman, but I am asking a question on the motion. I would appreciate some answer from either the government or somebody in the committee. If we don't know who we are going to get the money from, Mr. Chairman, I am wondering what is the purpose of this motion. I would like clarification on the motion. Thank you.

Thank you. The committee, in deliberating and reviewing this issue, was also left with the same questions. The intent of the motion is to review this payment, assess the feasibility of recovering and, from whom. That is why we are asking for the review. The question is left unanswered. We know that Mr. DeLury, at the time, was on contract to the Executive Council through the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, and that he did get approval to work for two days, but then the resulting bill was for 69 hours and some $8,000. The assessment that we are looking for is to determine what components were approved, what was not approved, and the resulting legal implications as to who the recovery should come from.