Mr. Speaker, the short answer to it is that the courts when passing sentence give certain instructions. In this case the court, or the judge as far as I know has not issued specific instructions with regard to some of the suggestions made by the lawyers during the proceedings. As I have indicated earlier, once the person is sentenced they become the responsibility, and in this case, of Corrections Canada. By legislation and in keeping with their philosophy, both Corrections Canada and the territorial government's correctional system worked together to decide where the best location for this particular inmate would be. With the advice and full support of Corrections Canada it was decided to use the exchange agreement to have the particular inmate placed in the facility in Fort Smith.

Mr. Speaker, the court system dealt with this particular individual. There was due process followed and a sentence was passed. Through our correctional system, we worked with the federal correctional people to work out what we thought was an acceptable arrangement for this specific individual. Whether we think the sentence was punishing enough, whether we thought it reflects enough hurt and whatever else people may feel should be inflicted on the individuals who perpetuate crimes is really not an issue here. The location of the institution may be more of an issue if the Member's constituents take particular exception to this institution sitting in the midst of their tranquil community. If they are upset about what they see as high risk inmates running around their community, going to the educational institution which is also located there, then that is a different issue. That can be addressed, possibly, in another way.

Mr. Speaker, the federal government is still responsible for prosecutions. It is the federal government which lays charges. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the territorial justice system is not the agency which is set up with the sole mandate of deterring people from committing crimes. Our mandate more specifically focuses on dealing with people who commit crimes and are dealt with by the courts. There is some work we are trying to do in some of the areas, but much of the work remains in Education, Social Services, Health and in many of the other programs of the government. The question is so broad and general that I simply cannot answer it.

Mr. Speaker, I indicated to the Member yesterday in a private conversation that we should be careful not to take over the collective negotiations on behalf of the unions and employees here in the Legislature because the issue of salaries, settlement allowances, vacation travel assistance, other benefits as well as many of the other issues that affect the benefits and salaries of employees are negotiated by the unions at the appropriate time with the government. Such things like the settlement allowance, for instance, are used to offset the different costs of living in different areas of the north. There will be some evening out of benefits. The Member knows it will be up to the unions to decide when negotiations commence, and where the limited dollars, which the government may have to offer in the course of negotiations, will be best used. If they choose to put it all in vacation travel assistance or in settlement allowances then there will not be much money for salary levels. Again, the pay equity issue is a huge outstanding issue that can affect not only the union negotiations but the entire fiscal position of this government. We have responded as a government. The response I gave in the course of the debate on the motion, I think, was clear. That is the extent to which the government is prepared to make changes. It has been done in consultation with the MLAs, I think that is a fair way to proceed and that is the way we are going to leave it at this time. Thank you.