We allowed a certain amount of latitude. I think you may have carried it a little too far, Mr. Kakfwi. Please think about that in future.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Ningark.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is directed to the honourable Minister of Transportation. Mr. Speaker, while we put pavement on the roads in the western Arctic, the eastern communities are requesting gravel roads and the need is not being addressed by this government. We are talking about facilitating all-terrain vehicles in the eastern Arctic. We have been requesting this transportation infrastructure since I have been a Member of this House during the past two years. What is the Minister of Transportation doing to address the needs of the eastern Arctic communities?

Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are building an all-weather road from Churchill to Rankin Inlet at a cost of $1 billion. It is a serious question and I would really like to build the road. The department in preparing its budget, are going to take into consideration the kinds of roads that the honourable Member from Pelly Bay is talking about. There will be consideration given, but while there is a significant amount of expenditure in the highway system in the west, some due consideration must be given for some internal community roads to facilitate people to the hunting and fishing areas. I hope when we look at the capital process later in the year we

will be able to accommodate Mr. Ningark as well as others. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When is the honourable Minister going to accommodate my community? Thank you.

Minister of Transportation, Mr. Todd.

We will have continuing discussions and ongoing dialogue with respect to Mr. Ningark's concerns. I hope in the process which has been set up by the Premier with respect to determining capital and priorities within the communities, that the kind of road and infrastructure which Mr. Ningark rightly deserves will be reflected in the priorities established by the hamlet council in consultation with the honourable Member. Thank you.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On January 13 of this year the Government Leader met with Tom Siddon, the Minister of Indian Affairs. One of the concerns he expressed at that time by form of a letter was with regard to the Canadian Armed Forces shooting caribou in the Northwest Territories. In his letter to the Minister, he said he wished to convey his concern to Kim Campbell who is the Minister of National Defence. Has any progress been made with regard to the Minister making an apology on behalf of the Canadian Armed Forces for the way they acted and using the kind of weapons they did to kill the caribou?

Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, there was a follow-up call to find out when we could have a response on that plus some other items, but there has been no further reply from Ms. Campbell.

Item 5, oral questions. Item 6, written questions. Item 7, returns to written questions. Item 8, replies to opening address. Item 9, replies to budget address. Mr. Koe.

Thank you, Mr. Koe. Item 9, replies to budget address. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am very pleased to have this opportunity to reply to the budget address for the 1993-94 fiscal year. As honourable Members will know, the financial challenge which we will be facing as the Government of the Northwest Territories during the next fiscal year are going to be more significant than we have ever encountered before.

Government Priorities

This government is going to have to set its priorities on three things:

-First, there is going to need to be a renewed commitment to "value for money" -- we have to make sure that accountability systems are in place, which guarantee that government programs and services are running with the greatest degree of cost-efficiency. Each spending decision must be scrutinized to ensure there is not a better, more cost efficient way, of achieving the same goal.

-Secondly, there are going to have to be some cuts in programs. No one likes to see this, Mr. Speaker, but the fact of the matter is that, right now, we do not have enough money to pay for everything we would like to do. We do not have the resources to devote to programs or services which only benefit a single region. There must be more equitable distribution of funds based on the priorities that have been identified by people in the communities. We are going to have to cut spending on some programs and services, Mr. Speaker. It is unfortunate, but there is no way around it. We are limited in the amount of revenues which we can generate. Mr. Koe has elaborated on that already. We are limited by the unwillingness of the federal government to fund the territories at a level that will allow us to continue growing. The only way we can beat our way out of this deficit situation is to save money by cutting excess dollars from some of the programs and services.

-Finally, Mr. Speaker, we need a better picture of where we are going. To date, all this government has presented to the House has been a disconnected collection of financial and program initiatives and more bad news about federal cutbacks. We do not have an understanding of the government's financial platform. There does not seem to be a strategy, which ties together the way that all departments should be dealing with the deficit. The Auditor General of Canada noticed there is no strategic plan for the Department of Health. The Standing Committee on Finance pointed out that there is no "vision" for the future. This is an area where we are in bad need of good leadership. I hope that it can be addressed soon by the Premier and her Cabinet colleagues.

GNWT Employee Training

Mr. Speaker, I want to say some more about the need to ensure that there are mechanisms in place for accountability in government spending. For years, it was more or less accepted in the public service that a fair bit of latitude should be given to staff in how to plan their training activities.

When many government workers want to go on a course, the tendency in previous years was to look at this as an excuse for getting down south to visit mom and dad, perhaps see a show or two and get a great deal of shopping done. It was common practice to plan duty travel around personal agendas, even when there were more cost-efficient ways of receiving the necessary training.

Fortunately, Mr. Speaker, most departments now seem to have better control over how training dollars are spent. In most departments, there seems to be a new commitment to tracking training funds and activities in a way that leads to good financial control. While they have not always liked it, I think our hard-working public servants have accepted that as the way it should be.

As long as these measures are tightened up equally on every one, I believe government workers will always be understanding and supportive. However, I am concerned that the same system may not be in place with respect to the training activities of judges in the Northwest Territories.

Judges' Training

Mr. Speaker, this matter has been raised previously. On February 25, 1992, a written question was asked about the type and cost of training received by judges. The government's response was that "training is something which the judiciary administers by itself." On September 30, 1992, I raised this with the Honourable Stephen Kakfwi.

At that time, he stated all we do is provide money for them to run a justice system. He said we provide money for them to take training and those things they deem for themselves as necessary to carry out their judicial duties.

Again, on November 23, I gave a Member's statement, in which I said that I simply cannot agree with the principle that expenditures on judges' training should be kept secret from the public.

Mr. Speaker, I fully understand the principle that the judiciary must be independent from the Legislative Assembly, at least in terms of its ability to make judgement on matters of law. What we are talking about here is not the same thing. We are talking about an expenditure of public money. I believe the public has a right to know how all its money is being used by government. That includes knowing where, and in what amounts, the Department of Justice is spending money to train judges. Of course, the judges are going to try to use all sorts of arguments about why we should not know this. They are going to say that "the administration of the courts cannot become an executive function."

Mr. Speaker, in a 1985 Supreme Court decision, known as Valente versus the Queen, it was clearly stated that essential requirements of judicial controls were always intended to refer to things such as assigning the court rooms, organizing the sitting of the courts and court lists, and supervising administrative staff. It is important for those things to be under the control of the judiciary, but nothing was said about having to keep training activities secret.

Judges' financial situations should not be based on the will of the Legislative Assembly either. The system will not work if the House was to cut judges' salaries for unpopular decisions. Their ability to judge cases independently of the Legislative Assembly cannot be threatened. Those are the essential elements of the independence of the judiciary. I have no trouble with any of them. However, that is not what we are talking about.

The judges are spending public money to go on training courses. To be responsible, we need to ensure this money is being spent appropriately. We need to know, for instance, that a judge is not going to Miami for a course that could be taken in Yellowknife or Edmonton; that their cross-cultural training workshops are being delivered by people who understand the culture of the north, as opposed to a sociologist, lawyer or other so-called southern expert; and, that judges are picking courses that will be helpful in the areas of administrative law, civil law and family law, as well as aspects of criminal law.

Mr. Speaker, we are the trustees of the public purse. I do not think it is right for us to throw money down a well without knowing what is happening to it. In a reply to a written question I asked, the Minister has acknowledged that, "The Member is correct in saying that public expenditures on judicial training may be appropriately scrutinized by the Legislature and its committees." Then, he seems to reserve his position in the same document and says, "Judges are independent of the Legislature and not accountable to it for how they train themselves, nor should this Legislature scrutinize the specific training taken by individual judges and make comment or criticism on it."

Mr. Speaker, I do not buy that. There is no reason why we should not be supplied with the specific training taken by individual judges. If they are so afraid of being criticized, then list them as "Judge number one and Judge number two," and so on. The Minister's documents provided some total figures for training but very little detail. As you know, Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of privilege for this Assembly to have the disclosure of all the necessary details before we vote on appropriations.

In my November 23 statement I commented that unless the House is provided with a list showing how previous year's training dollars have been spent, I will oppose further appropriation for judges to attend workshop courses or training institutes when we deal with the 1993-94 budget. My position has not changed since. The people of the Northwest Territories should know their money is being spent appropriately.

At the proper time, I will consider introducing a motion in committee of the whole to defer territorial court budgets until the details are provided. Further, at the appropriate time, I will consider introducing a motion in committee of the whole that future main estimates should clearly state how much money has been allocated for judges' training. This is the way it was in 1991-92. Since then, the training budgets have been buried away in the overall costs of the territorial courts. I hope the government will see the importance of this principle and will approach this matter with a spirit of cooperation and consensus.

Highway Patrol Service

There was a second issue which I wanted to spend some time discussing today which pertains to the high cost of delivering the current highway patrol services. As I mentioned earlier, our financial situation is making it necessary to cut spending. We must come to grips with the fact that we cannot deliver programs and services which are beyond our means, even if they would be nice to have. I believe many of the functions performed by the highway patrol service could be cut at substantial savings. I believe regular inspections of transport vehicles are necessary. These should continue to be provided by manning the weigh stations on our highways. However, the additional capital expenses of buying and maintaining a fleet of vehicles for highway patrol officers to cruise a few miles of highway, the costly capital and the operational requirements for radar equipment, and the additional PYs that would otherwise be eliminated to reduce the deficit can and should receive a hard examination of this Assembly a few days from now when Mr. Todd's budget is under review.

I am a strong supporter of ensuring that vehicles on highways are safe. That is why I am convinced that the regulatory activities of weigh stations should continue to follow current standards, but I simply cannot see how people who live in Rankin Inlet, Tuktoyaktuk, Lutsel K'e and Whale Cove are going to agree with the idea of paying a salary to someone to sit on the highway near Hay River or Fort Providence to stop one person every 26 hours. That is not value for money, that is not an equitable distribution of funds. That is not even common sense. I believe spending cuts must be made in this over-exaggerated highway compliance system.

When we deal with the Transportation budget, I would like to ask Members to consider deleting portions of the budget which pays for these little cars to cruise around with their radar outfits beeping. I will be asking the Minister to identify the essential elements of these program areas, such as the weigh station compliance inspection and then trim off the rest of the fat. Mr. Speaker, perhaps some of the money we save could be allocated in the direction of increasing the rate per ton paid to independent long-distance hauling by this government, or other initiatives that would foster strong and responsible transportation industry in the north.

Those are the main points I wish to cover in my reply to the budget address, Mr. Speaker. Before closing, I would like to say I am glad my honourable colleague for Nahendeh has agreed to chair the Standing Committee on Finance. I am sure he will be able to maintain the high standards there were by the earlier chairpersons. I would like to thank all the Members of the Standing Committee on Finance for the many hours of hard work they have devoted to review this year's budget. Their work is certainly appreciated. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Gargan. Item 9, replies to budget address. Item 10, petitions. Item 11, reports of standing and special committees. Item 12, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 13, tabling of documents. Item 14, notices of motion. Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can I ask for unanimous consent to return to item 13, tabling of documents?

You certainly can, Mr. Todd. The honourable Member is seeking unanimous consent. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Please proceed, Mr. Todd.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table Tabled Document 69-12(3), the 38th annual report of the Northwest Territories Liquor Commission for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1992.

Item 13, tabling of documents. Item 15, notices of motions for first reading of bills. Mr. Nerysoo.

FOR FIRST READING OF BILLS

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Wednesday, March 3, 1993, I shall move that Bill 19, An Act to Amend the Student Financial Assistance Act, be read for the first time.