I'd like to ask the Minister, was she aware that the consultant hired to develop this act was, in fact, Professor Nelson from Simon Fraser University?

Minister Mike.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't get involved with the administration part of the function of Social Services unless there is a concern and politically sensitive issues, that's where my job comes in. I was not aware of this person you are talking about being in town, so I have not met with him. Thank you.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Koe.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment Programs. I'm trying to determine the facts, Mr. Speaker, as they relate to the special study done by the Languages Commissioner in her review of the Canada/Northwest Territories cooperation agreement on aboriginal languages and French. On December 1, 1993, the Minister stated, and I quote from unedited Hansard, "the department has not had an opportunity to review the facts in these reports. There is refutable information in this report." My question to the Minister is, has the department completed its review and is the report available on what facts are refutable or not completely accurate?

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The difficulty with trying to address these particular questions is, like all other Members, when one gets up in the House and makes statements chastising Ministers, it becomes very difficult to respond.

What was clear on that particular day was this: I spoke to one of the Members opposite, who indicated that we, the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, had not spent $427,000. Rather, we had only spent approximately $152,000. That is incorrect. They should be reversed. We have spent $400,000 and the fact is, we have not spent $152,000 in Arctic College.

The problem with responding generally to the question is that we have not seen and assessed all the questions and the recommendations that have been made. Like Mr. Lewis, I agree with the importance, and I think the honourable Member's interests are articulated quite clearly. Time spent on reviewing the report can only give us an opportunity to clarify some of the initiatives this government has undertaken, in response to some of the significant concerns that have been expressed in the report already, since I have become a Minister and prior to the tabling of that report in this House. So, that makes it very difficult for us to generalize on some of the comments that have been made and at the same time respond, first of all, by asking the Commissioner questions and, secondly, by providing a detailed summary and response to the report in this House.

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

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Again, I was just quoting from the statements made by the Minister in Hansard on December 1. Another quote that the Minister made was in response to one of my colleagues. He stated that, "the federal Secretary of State agreed to a budget cut of four per cent." Yet, in a motion which I made in March, and from my understanding of the issue, the actual cut was ten per cent. I would like to ask the Minister, which is the correct number?

Mr. Nerysoo.

Again, Mr. Speaker, that depends on what you're talking about. The fact is, under the French language educational programming, the Secretary of State agreed to a four per cent reduction only. Under the aboriginal languages area, it was ten per cent. So, the problem is, it depends on what it is you're talking about. The general criticism directed to me by the honourable colleague opposite, was that we did not stand up to the government, in terms of making sure that certain cuts did not take place. We were not successful in the aboriginal rights languages area, but we were able to protect the French language area.

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

Again, I'm just quoting from statements made and the questions answered. I didn't ask those particular questions...

Point of order, Mr. Nerysoo.

Point Of Order

Mr. Speaker, I'm concerned about the notion, or the suggestion, of quoting from unedited Hansard on a regular basis. Is it not a rule of this House that we must be careful with the matter of using unedited Hansard?

Mr. Nerysoo, to your point of order, I think it's been the practice of this House, when Ministers make statements in the House that are recorded in unedited Hansard, Ministers are accountable for those statements. The honourable Member has quoted, so far, two different

statements, but hasn't repeated each one. I think the line of questioning is fair and I will allow it to continue. If the chair feels that this line of questioning is getting too repetitive, the chair will end this line of questioning. Carry on, Mr. Koe.

Once again, I'm trying to determine the facts so we can properly assess the report and the issues related to it. The Minister, in response to a question again on December 1, stated and I quote from unedited Hansard, "there is a ten per cent allowance to move money from one project to another." My understanding of the agreement is that there is a 25 per cent allowance to reallocate funds upon approval of the federal government. Again, I'd like to know which is the correct number.

Mr. Nerysoo.

Mr. Speaker, the correct number is 25 per cent. The fact is, the honourable Member is misleading the House again by suggesting that it's 25 per cent that can be moved around. The fact is, it's project to project on...

Mr. Koe.

Point Of Order

I think there's an allegation being made that I'm misleading the House. I'm just quoting from unedited Hansard in my question and the statements made by the Minister.

If I could just make a response to your point of order. The problem with quoting from unedited Hansard is sometimes the quotation can be taken out of context. I think that was Mr. Nerysoo's original point of order. It gets difficult for Members of the House to follow a line of questioning that may be hinging on one sentence, as opposed to the overall context of the original words.

First of all, I would ask if Mr. Nerysoo would reconsider his statement, then I would ask if Mr. Koe would be cautious in the line of questioning to make sure there is enough context in the line of questioning so it's clear to all Members of the House and to the Minister, exactly what the question is referring to. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll certainly review the Hansard and if there's a suggestion of allegation, I will apologize for it.

Item 5, oral questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.