Good afternoon. Before we commence with orders of the day, I would like to recognize in the visitors' gallery the former Deputy Commissioner of the Northwest Territories, Ann Hansen.

---Applause

Orders of the day. Item 2, Ministers' statements. Mr. Allooloo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As most northerners know, land is a valuable and scarce resource which must be managed by all governments, in trust for the present generation and future generations of our people. The importance of this resource to communities has been recognized in the Nunavut final claim agreement, which calls for all Commissioner's land -- land held by the Government of the Northwest Territories -- in the built-up areas to be transferred to the municipalities of Nunavut within three years after the agreement is ratified. Claims under way or being implemented in the Dene/Metis claims settlement area in the western Arctic may also be expected to promote greater community control of municipal lands.

Up until now, the role of many municipalities, especially of the hamlets, in land management has been limited. Hamlets would give the GNWT advice on who should receive a parcel or parcels of Commissioner's land, and often the hamlets would act as the GNWT agent for purposes of receiving applications for land from local residents.

Now -- as the claims process is completed in each area and in response to wishes of communities to seek more authorities under initiatives such as the community transfer initiative -- municipal governments will be able to take on direct management and control of complex land administration programs, which require technical and legal expertise and are tied in with the community planning and zoning processes.

In order to assist municipal governments of the NWT in getting ready for major new authority and responsibilities in municipal land management, Cabinet has approved a revised municipal lands policy. This policy is based on principles which emphasize the following: municipal lands as a valuable resource; the need for government to use fair and consistent practices when selling or leasing municipal lands; that when municipal land is sold, it should normally be sold at a price which only recovers the costs of government to develop the land; and, that land speculation should be discouraged.

Some of the major features of the new municipal lands policy include the following: the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs and each municipal council would sign a land administration agreement which would outline the conditions for transfer of Commissioner's land to the municipal corporation; municipal councils would pass by-laws to adopt their land administration agreements with the Minister. The land administration agreement will be a public document and the community residents will know how the municipal government intends to price municipal land for lease or sale; municipal governments would be expected to set the price for new land lots on the basis of the costs to territorial and municipal governments of developing the lots. This should ensure that the public, especially new home owners and small businesses starting up, pay reasonable prices for lots.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that this new municipal lands policy clearly places community governments on the road to exercising autonomy in the management of public lands in their communities. The department has developed draft legislation intended to support this policy further and place even more authority in the hands of municipal governments. I will table this draft legislation with the Assembly today.

The municipal lands policy is being translated and will be sent to mayors and councils as soon as possible over the next month. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Item 2, Ministers' statements. Mr. Kakfwi.

Item 2, Ministers statements. Mr. Kakfwi.

Item 2, Ministers' statements. Mr. Kakfwi.

Item 2, Ministers' statements. Mr. Allooloo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the Minister of Renewable Resources I am responsible for maintaining the health of renewable resources in one third of Canada. To accomplish this task, I have always tried to work in partnership with the federal government. By pooling resources and working jointly, we have accomplished a number of tasks that would have been impossible alone.

Lately, though, Mr. speaker, I have heard that our federal partners are considering or have made funding cuts to a number of northern programs relating to renewable resource management. As with other federal cuts, there has been no consultation with our government. I find this very disturbing.

The proposed funding cuts that we are aware of include:

1. the humane trap research program which is also jointly funded by all other jurisdictions. This research is vital to developing new harvesting methods prior to 1995 when the European legislation takes effect to ban the import of furs from any country not using humane traps;

2. core funding to Indigenous Survival International which has promoted the northern life-styles and the northern fur industry in Europe;

3. the rabies vaccine program which has provided protection to our working dog teams that are used for harvesting and sport hunting in remote communities where there is no access to veterinarians; and,

4. a partial cut to funding promised to maintain the bison free zone south of Fort Providence and to help operate the Hanging Ice Bison Ranch. Until the diseased bison issue in Wood Buffalo Park is resolved, the corridor is the only way to keep healthy bison in the Mackenzie bison sanctuary and the Liard area from contacting diseased bison. The Hanging Ice Bison Ranch is an option being considered by the northern buffalo management board for raising bison for restocking. Federal support is needed to keep the ranch active.

I will be writing to each federal Minister to request that we be advised of potential cuts to renewable resource programs, and that we be involved in establishing priorities.

Renewable resources are very important to the life-styles and future economic options for our residents. We must do all we can to ensure that these resources remain healthy and abundant. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Item 2, Ministers' statements. Mr. Kakfwi.

Item 2, Ministers' statements. Item 3, Members' statements. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to express the concerns shared by the Members of the Ordinary Members' Caucus regarding the off-loading of federal responsibilities to this government. Over the past ten years we have seen a number of federal responsibilities transferred to this government, including inter-territorial highways, Baffin health services, NWT health services, forestry and fire suppression, Arctic B and C airports and a northern scientific resource centre.

Mr. Speaker, along with these responsibilities came resources. We had facilities, program services, person years and, of course, finances transferred to us. We understood that what we were given represented the amount that the federal government had required to run the programs. It seems that when this government inherited these program responsibilities, it also inherited the program deficiencies.

We receive funds each year from the federal government, and these monies are escalating or increased annually in a form of monies received under the formula financing agreement. Are these funds actually adequate to operate the program? The Members of the Ordinary Members' Caucus do not believe so. Just look at the dilemma this government is in with respect to northern highways. Northerners rely heavily on air transportation and to a lesser extent on road travel. Yet since taking over responsibilities for highways and Arctic A, B and C airports we do not have a proper transportation infrastructure in place.

Both the Beatty report and the government's own transportation strategy point to this inadequacy. Although the federal government still has responsibility for construction of new roads, I have yet to hear any firm commitment from them to start building.

Look also at the problems this government faces regarding the provision of health care services. Taxpayer's dollars are now being spent on a legal dispute involving the interpretation of the health transfer agreement. Did the GNWT acquire the responsibility to pay this for the health care of the Indian and Inuit people? A clear federal responsibility in the bargain.

Mrs. Marie-Jewell, your allotted time has elapsed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to continue.

The honourable Member is seeking unanimous consent. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Please proceed, Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How long is this battle going to go on? What will it cost us and what will it mean if we lose? At the least, our relations with Ottawa will be strained. Meanwhile, in the midst of that dispute, this government is spending $200 million on health care. Ordinary Members are very concerned with the chain of events to date and the current status of devolution. We wonder if this government can really handle all the program areas transferred to it, and can we afford to do so?

We ask this government to take a hard look at the whole process of devolution from its inception to the present day, including an examination of negotiations currently under way. One example of where to begin would be the northern accord.

Perhaps, we can learn from our past experiences. Mr. Speaker, the Members will be asking questions on this issue today. They are very concerned as to where the government is heading, particularly, in this area. Thank you.

---Applause

Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Whitford.

Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Arvaluk.

(Translation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When the Special Committee on Education completed its final report a little more than 10 years ago, it set the process in motion for development of autonomous boards to allow local administration of educational facilities, staff and programs.

Today there is much confusion about the degree of autonomy which divisional boards of education are allowed to exercise. There are mixed messages, Mr. Speaker. On one hand, the Government of the Northwest Territories has stated that it supports local and divisional control of education and, on the other hand, the Department of Education, Culture and Employment Programs continues to tie the hands of board officials with administrative directives that leave the real power in the hands of its bureaucrats. For instance, the Keewatin divisional board of education has been eager to exercise its rightful authority to appoint both the director of education and the supervisor of schools as its employees and to determine the terms of their appointments. Although the board is given this authority on paper, administrative directives exist which severely limit the board's flexibility in selecting the appropriate candidates in establishing terms and conditions of employment.

The department establishes what these terms will be. The board is supposed to merely be the signing authority. The directive even states...

Mr. Arvaluk, your allotted time has elapsed. Mr. Arvaluk.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

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

(Translation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The directive even states that the director of education should cooperate with the divisional board. Mr. Speaker, if this was a truly autonomous board the expectation would be for the employee to be answerable to the board, to be accountable to the board, not just cooperative.

I believe that the Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment Programs should be moving into the direction of increasing the authority of divisional boards of education, not tying them down in more bureaucratic red tape from Yellowknife.

I hope that the Minister will agree to address this matter at the earliest opportunity. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday, I spoke about the important work of Bill Fitzhugh, of the Smithsonian in the Frobisher Bay area, and later I am going to table a letter from Dr. Fitzhugh on that subject.

Today I would like to talk about the recent Inuit land claim to which the Government of the Northwest Territories is a signatory and the important attention that agreement pays to the subject of archaeology.

Article 33 of the claim cites, as general principles, that the archaeological record of the Inuit, associated with their use and occupancy represents a cultural, historical and ethnographic heritage of Inuit society, and that this archaeological record is of spiritual, cultural, religious and educational importance to the Inuit. I am pleased to address this very important subject today in the presence of Ann Meekitjuk Hanson of Iqaluit who, with the full support of this Assembly, was instrumental in persuading the Minister of Indian Affairs of the day and his department to repatriate significant parts of the DIAND Inuit art collection to the Northwest Territories.

Unfortunately, there are at present no facilities in place in Nunavut for the secure, climate controlled storage of this and other precious evidence of what the Inuit land claim describes as, "a record of the Inuit use and occupancy of their lands through time." It has been, therefore, necessary to store the artifacts from the Inuit art collection at the facilities of the Prince of Wales Heritage Centre in Yellowknife -- temporarily, I hope.

Section 33.2(4) of the Inuit land claims final agreement states, and I quote, "There is an urgent need to establish facilities in the Nunavut settlement area for the conservation and management of a representative proportion of the archaeological record. It is desirable that the proportion of the Nunavut settlement area archaeological record finding a permanent home in the Nunavut settlement area increase over time."

Mr. Speaker, I am confident... that I will not be able to finish this statement in time.

---Laughter

Mr. Speaker, may I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

The honourable Member is confidently seeking unanimous consent to continue. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Please proceed, Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Members. I am confident that the new policy on museums, which is being developed by the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment Programs, will take into account these important provisions in the Inuit land claim agreement, and will be in place in advance of the next budget cycle so that plans can be put in place to establish necessary facilities in Nunavut communities, so that the many artifacts of the Inuit heritage now in museums and storage outside of Nunavut, can be repatriated, stored, protected, studied, displayed and enjoyed in the Inuit home land. Qujannamiik.

Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Kakfwi.

Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have been a Member for ten years and through that time there has been a great deal of highway construction in my constituency. That has, in return, benefited many people, in Hay River, Hay River Reserve, Kakisa and Fort Providence. I would like to thank the government for it.

One of the concerns I have, Mr. Speaker, is with regard to private truck operators. We have many of them who do operate large vehicles to haul gravel and asphalt for the repaving of the roads. Those people are not being paid as high a rate as they would be in Alberta. Although many people have benefited, private truckers who own their own vehicles and operate during construction season are not making a good living. I would like to ask the Minister and the government to ensure, when they are awarded contracts, the truckers are given a fair return for hauling. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Gargan. Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Lewis.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think the last few weeks have demonstrated that in the spirit of goodwill, the 24 people present have been able to accomplish a great deal. That has proven to be a rather desperate position for the press. That is being remedied by the Federation of Labour deciding today to take on new powers. They have decided to re-dedicate April fool's day as annual MLAs' day.

---Laughter

They, in fact, are going to have a protest march at 5:00 pm today outside of the Legislative Assembly building at the corner of the YK Inn. They made a long list of those foolish items which they say we are guilty of. It is incredible that a federation of labour should take on, itself, the power to say that the people of the Northwest Territories are held in such ill-favour by the federation of labour that they consider the people elected by that electorate are not doing the work they were asked to do, but, in fact, behaving foolishly. I think it is a terrible thing for any union to do, tell ordinary people that the 24 people who represent them are fools. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Item 3, Members' statements. Item 4, returns to oral questions. Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a return to oral question, asked by Mrs. Marie-Jewell on December 3, 1992, with respect to WCB contribution of funds to carry out a survey.

Ron Williams, then deputy chairman of the WCB and Jim Evoy, board director, recommended a grant of $15,000 be provided to organized labour to develop an NWT workers' education program on WCB matters. This program to be comparable to that of the Ontario WCB and the Ontario federation of labour's nationally recognized initiative.

Messrs. Williams and Evoy comprised the committee established to review and report on the workers' advisor function and this was one of the recommendations contained in their report of March 30, 1992.

Item 4, returns to oral questions. Mr. Kakfwi.

Item 4, returns to oral questions. Ms. Cournoyea.

Mr. Speaker, I have a return to an oral question asked by Mr. Fred Koe on March 29, concerning revision to the development policy.

Mr. Speaker, the policy on policy development has not been revised since 1983. It does establish the government's authority to develop policy and outlines the process by which policy proposals will be reviewed, approved and implemented. It is true that some of the terminology is out of date. For example, the document referred to as the senior managers' handbook is now commonly called the Executive committee systems handbook. However, the process, authorities and responsibilities remain current.

Mr. Patterson asked whether the priorities and planning committee of Cabinet is still in existence. As was indicated on March 29, in the past all Members of Cabinet sat on the priorities and planning committee, but Cabinet is now functioning as a priorities and planning committee. Previously, the Cabinet was, in effect, making recommendations to itself by sitting in a separate meeting as a priorities and planning committee. Cabinet now deliberates on policy proposals as many times as it takes to get it right. The policy is not inconsistent in this regard, Cabinet has not dissolved the priorities and planning committee, it just constitutes itself as such when required.

With regard to the screening of policy proposals, there is basically no change to the process since Mr. Patterson was Government Leader. Central agencies such as the Priorities and Planning Secretariat provide advice through an assessment process. As Mr. Patterson knows, it is the prerogative of the Government Leader to screen Cabinet submissions as part of the agenda building responsibility. As chair, the Government Leader decides what goes on the Cabinet agenda and when. Cabinet decides on whether a policy is approved by reviewing the Minister's submission and the independent assessment report.

Mr. Koe noted that the policy development policy provides for the review of government policies, neither this government nor the previous government has been stagnant in this regard. Policies are continually monitored by Ministers and their departmental staff by central agencies to ensure they are up-to-date. In the life of this government, for example, five new policies have been developed and approved and there have been 19 amendments to existing policies approved by Cabinet.

However, as some Members noted in their questions, it is true that some terminology in the GNWT policy manual is out of date. An overall review of the manual has been conducted and areas requiring update have been noted. However, since a complete revision and reprinting of the manual is an expensive and time-consuming undertaking, the government has chosen to wait until the process of departmental consolidation is complete before revising and reprinting the entire document. In the meantime, the reference to ministerial authority such as the reference to the Minister of Public Works and Highways, noted by Mr. Antoine, is not of great concern because clarification of ministerial responsibilities is reflected in the departmental establishment policies which are revised as an area of responsibility as transferred from one department to another in much the same way that the Interpretation Act covers off inconsistencies in the use of terminology in legislation. The establishment policies ensure that ministerial responsibilities are clearly defined. In any interim period while provisions are being processed Cabinet records of decision specify ministerial responsibility.

Finally with regard to Mrs. Marie-Jewell's question to Mr. Pollard yesterday about consistencies of definitions in policies, it should be noted that although all policies are screened for consistency, sometimes definitions cannot be standardized among policies. For example, although we would all agree that the word "resident" refers to someone who resides in the north, for the purposes of specific programs resident requirements will differ. Thus the term might be defined differently in different policies, for example six months and up to five years in another.

I have another return to a question, asked by Mr. Antoine on March 29, 1993, with regard to the revision of the GNWT transfer policy.

Revisions to the transfer policy to reflect changes in ministerial authorities will occur as part of an overall revision and update of the GNWT policy manual, once the process of consolidating departments is completed.

As I indicated in my previous response, there is no gap in responsibilities as ministerial mandates have been clarified through revisions to establish policies or interim records of decision.

Mr. Speaker, I have a return to an oral question asked by Mrs. Marie-Jewell on March 19, 1993, asked of Mr. Don Morin, Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation, regarding the annual report of the NWT Housing Corporation.

Mr. Morin had hoped to table the 1991-92 annual report of the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation during this session. However, there have been unavoidable delays with the Inuktitut translation, and the report will not be ready until late April.

Mr. Morin will table the 1991-92 annual report at the beginning of the next session. The 1992-93 annual report will also be tabled at that time. Thank you.

Item 4, returns to oral questions. Mr. Allooloo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a return to an oral question asked by Mrs. Marie-Jewell on March 24, 1993, regarding policy on sales and shipping of caribou parts.

Over the past several years, the Department of Renewable Resources has been discussing the need for a policy on the sale of inedible parts of wildlife with regional renewable resource boards and organizations. To date, no consensus has been reached. Any policy developed will have to reflect regional concerns. The department will continue to work with regional renewable resource boards on this issue.

Existing legislation does allow the sale and shipping of animal parts. An export permit is required for anyone to ship caribou parts out of the Northwest Territories. To obtain an export permit, a person must demonstrate that the parts were legally obtained. Parts may be legally obtained by harvesting caribou under the authority of a licence, or by purchasing them from a hunter who has legally harvested a caribou under the authority of a licence. When parts are shipped, the licence number of person selling the parts is needed to prove legal possession. Thank you.

Item 4, returns to oral questions. Ms. Cournoyea.

Mr. Speaker, I have a return to an oral question, asked by Mrs. Jeannie Marie-Jewell on March 30, 1993, of the Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation, regarding rural and remote programs.

The Northwest Territories Housing Corporation has not written off any units under the rural and remote program. In a few instances, rural and remote clients have abandoned their units, or signed quit claims, giving ownership of the unit back to the corporation. In these cases, the corporation has either converted the unit to public housing or sold the unit by public tender.

Mr. Speaker, I have a return to an oral question, asked by Mr. Koe to the Honourable Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation, Don Morin, with regard to the annual meetings of the NWT Housing Corporation.

Members passed a number of motions in this House in December, recommending that the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation implement its consultation framework in 1993-94. An important element of the consultation framework is annual community and district meetings.

Community meetings will be open to the public and will provide an opportunity for people to discuss local concerns and receive information. Representatives from community housing organizations will meet once a year for a district meeting to discuss regional concerns and provide input to new corporation policies and programs. If a community does not have a housing association or authority, representatives from the community government, band council, Metis local and development corporation will be invited to attend the district meeting.

The cost of the district meeting will depend on how many people attend from each community. If there is one representative, the meeting will cost about $70,000 per year for all six districts. Two representatives from each community would cost about $140,000. Mr. Morin states that he will be seeking the advice from the Advisory Committee on Social Housing with respect the appropriate number of representatives which should be invited from each community. Members of this House will be advised of the community representatives that have been invited from their constituencies. The Housing Corporation does not require any extra funding to implement the district meetings.

The district meetings will be organized to be as cost-effective as possible. These meetings have the potential to generate valuable feedback and good ideas. Recommendations made at district meetings will be forwarded to the Advisory Committee on Social Housing for their review. Mr. Morin will work with the advisory committee to determine the best way to respond to these concerns. The whole point of this exercise is to ensure that the corporation continues to deliver more effective programs in the future. This will surely be money well spent. Thank you.

Item 4, returns to oral questions. Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question will be directed to the Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment Programs. I have been very concerned about the fact that the report of the traditional knowledge working group has been completed for almost two years and there has been no constructive action taken on its recommendations.

The Legislative Assembly has been told on a number of occasions that the report is going to be considered by Cabinet. I must question what sort of priority the Cabinet officials have been placing on traditional aboriginal knowledge, when it has taken so long for the matter to be dealt with. Can the Minister tell the House today the status of the Cabinet's review of the report of the traditional working group?

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have not reviewed that document, at least, since I have become a Cabinet Member.

Supplementary, Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, to the Minister of Education, honourable Members have been told by previous Ministers that departmental officials are trying to prepare a summary of the report and its recommendations. I have never understood why this is necessary, since the report

was well-written and its recommendations should be able to stand on their own merit. Will the Minister assure the House that the elders and the other people who contributed to the traditional knowledge working group will have the opportunity to review the summary document.

Mr. Nerysoo. Madam Premier.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the work of the traditional knowledge working group will be assessed as soon as possible. We can make that commitment because I believe that we have had discussions with the Denendeh Cultural Institute and it is anticipated that the elders will be brought together at the earliest possible time to discuss the report and how they see us working those recommendations into the overall government framework. Thank you.

Supplementary, Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Premier, how soon do you expect to get the working group together to discuss this document?

Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, we had hoped that we would have that by the end of March, but I know there is some planning that has to go into it. We feel that it should take place as early as possible and perhaps it would be convenient for us to try to do that within the next 30 to 45 days.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Education. Mr. Speaker, I had made a Member's statement last week with regard to the western Arctic leadership program. I am concerned that that particular program may be having problems with respect to funding. I know there is concern in the community with regard to the western Arctic leadership program, particularly, with regard to a lack of funding. Will the Minister be willing to review and support the western Arctic leadership board in addressing this particular concern of lack of funding to operate the program. Thank you.

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The department has advised the chairman of the western Arctic leadership program board to actively seek private sources to enhance the program. We are prepared to work with them in that area and if there is any particular shortfall, as a result of those initiatives, either falling through or coming short of their financial resources, then we will be prepared to address that additional requirement when we are aware that there is in fact a shortfall.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Arvaluk.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment Programs. The Minister has already received communication from the Keewatin divisional board of education indicating that it should have the authority to employ and govern the functions of its own employees. This includes the authority to set the terms of contractual arrangements through which senior employees are hired by the board. Apparently, there are administrative directives which seriously limit the flexibility of the divisional board to extend the authority it should have. Will the Minister outline the status of the Keewatin divisional boards authority to contract with the director of education and the supervisor of schools.

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to advise the honourable Member and Members of this House that I have been given the authority to allow the regional boards of education to sign their contractual arrangements with their senior staff, their directors. However, I do want to inform the Members that there are requirements for some directives and some parameters by which these agreements can be signed. There are some problems. It is certainly my intention to try to move as far as possible to ensuring that there is independence and ability of the boards to make decisions. Until the Education Act is amended to respond to those needs, it would be premature of me to go forward without seeking the advice of the boards, the Members of this Assembly and the public to ensure there is some accountability on the part of the board, and the people they hire.

Supplementary, Mr. Arvaluk.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Keewatin divisional board of education has communicated the motions which it passed in January, they requested the Minister and the government to give the divisional board their rightful authority to determine the terms under which senior educational

personnel, in the regions, are employed. Has the Minister made a formal response to those requests?

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes. Previously, the boards did not have the authority to contract with their directors. Cabinet has given approval to ensure that the boards of education, in the regions, have the authority to contract with their directors. However, there are still some restrictions as a result of legislation and our desire to ensure that there is still some accountability on the manner of expenditures. As Minister, I am still responsible for over all expenditures. It is my intention and Cabinet's intention to try to move the responsibility along as far as possible. That is the first step and I have indicated this to the trustees when they met in February.

Supplementary, Mr. Arvaluk.

Mr. Speaker, I understand the Minister recently met with the chairman of the Keewatin divisional board of education and discussed some of these issues. Will the Minister make a commitment to fully review the administrative directives which seem to be getting in the way of the boards interests in exercising a more autonomous role in the Keewatin region.

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to indicate to the honourable Member that the department has been requested to provide a detailed response to the letter which was sent to me, as the Minister. I will be responding in detail to the issues which the board and the chairperson raised. However, I would like to assure you that whatever decisions we make in terms of expending financial resources in the regions or for that matter within each divisional area, that there is some accountability to the Minister. Because in the final analysis, as Minister, I am, in fact, responsible for the overall expenditure of financial resources. I agree with the honourable Member that we will try to move as far as possible, however, I do also suggest to the Member and other Members, that the significant requirement, and in order for us to accommodate the concerns of the honourable Member, is amending the Education Act. The Education Act does not allow us to go to the extent which the honourable Member requests us to go. It requires that consideration.

Item 5, oral questions. Final supplementary, Mr. Arvaluk.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister's response has sparked me to do a final supplementary. I understand perfectly that there is a restriction in the Education Act which does not allow the department or the Minister to have direct liaison, or for the chairman of the divisional board to be accountable to the people and the department, but rather the employee of the divisional board has to be accountable. Will the Minister inform the House that he will be thoroughly reviewing the Education Act to reflect that there has to be accountability, or at least communication between the chairman of the divisional board and the department or the Minister rather than the divisional board employees.

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On the matter of the contracting of the directors, I have indicated that approval has been given by Cabinet that divisional boards can contract with their employees. However, there are parameters. There are parameters by which those contracts can be issued.

The other consideration, Mr. Speaker, which the honourable Member has raised, is the matter of pursuing changes to the Education Act. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will, in fact, be pursuing that. The work in this Assembly has taken up most of the time and, therefore, I have been unable to continue with the work in that particular area.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Government Leader. Mr. Speaker, this is a huge territory which we are all responsible for, but it is a relatively small government. It is no secret to ordinary Members that there is currently wide spread speculation in the public service about deputy minister reassignments. I would like to ask the Government Leader, is she now considering a shuffle or reassignment of deputy ministers.

Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, at this moment I am not considering re-shuffling. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With respect, I think the Government Leader is being a little coy with us, in contrast to her usual demeanour. Mr. Speaker, my

supplementary would be, if she was considering senior management reassignments in the near future, tomorrow for instance, would the Government Leader inform Members of this Assembly of decisions made on such important matters while the House is in session and not after we go home? Thank you.

Ms. Cournoyea.

Mr. Speaker, I am not considering re-shuffling tomorrow. Thank you.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct my question to the Minister responsible for Personnel. On December 8, 1992, and again on March 17, 1993, I raised with the Minister the concerns of aboriginal employees in the Department of Public Works in Cambridge Bay who feel they have been discriminated against when promotions were made within the department. On December 8, the Minister advised that a complaint had been filed by the employees with the Human Rights Commission. Can the Minister advise whether his department has received any decisions or recommendations from the Human Rights Commission as a result of the commission's investigation?

Mr. Kakfwi.

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

Thank you. Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. The Minister explained an investigation team from his department was sent to the Kitikmeot. I understand that his department did not feel there was overt racial discrimination, but made a series of recommendations to the department about the management practices in the region. The Minister has referred to some of these recommendations in the House. Is the Minister willing to table the recommendations of his departmental investigation with respect to the management practices in the Kitikmeot region in the House?

Mr. Kakfwi.

The question has been taken as notice. Item 5, oral questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Education. Mr. Speaker, in the past couple of days I have heard that the South Slave divisional board has passed a motion in respect to wanting to move their headquarters from Fort Smith to Hay River. I am not fully aware whether the South Slave divisional board has its full complement of members as of yet. I believe they are without a member from Lutsel K'e and, possibly, from Fort Smith. However, I recognize that my colleague from Aivilik has expressed concerns with respect to board autonomy. However, I am beginning to think the opposite. Would the Minister review when he has previously committed to meet with the South Slave divisional board of education with respect to the motion which they recently passed to move their head office to ensure they can justify what they are planning to propose? Thank you.

Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I will review the matter. I want to indicate to the honourable Member that the matter of removing or, in fact, having Hay River as the headquarters requires regulation change and I am not prepared to amend any regulations on the matter of headquarters.

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Pudluk.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Government Leader. On February 23, 1993, I asked the Government Leader a written question. I asked why different strategies are in place governing the PanArctic clean up of the DEW Line site. Will the Government Leader provide an answer to that question during the sitting of this Legislature? Thank you.

Ms. Cournoyea.

Mr. Speaker, I believe the written response has been tabled. That was my understanding. Could the Clerk check?

That is not within the rules, either it is in the knowledge of the Premier that it has been tabled or it is not in the knowledge of the Premier. Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, it has been filed with the Clerk.

Thank you. Item 5, oral questions. It was filed with the Clerk today. Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Antoine.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister responsible for Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources. During discussion in committee of the whole when we were dealing with Bill 17, we were talking about the northern accord and that the department is negotiating the northern accord with the federal government. This northern accord, I understand, is transferring administration of oil and gas to the Government of the Northwest Territories. There was one comment that the Minister made which has been bothering me since that time. She indicated that the northern accord transfer is tied to the Gwich'in and Sahtu land claims. I understand that in the land claims process, the provision for resources is between the claimant group and the federal government, and I was wondering how the territorial government's negotiations in the northern accord are tied into this whole process. Thank you.

Ms. Cournoyea.

Mr. Speaker, in the overall Dene land claim there are certain provisions that are arrangements that the aboriginal people have as their private interests, whether it be sub-surface, surface or other areas in the claim. There was a difficulty with the federal government in the negotiations in that with private interest ownership, how do you deal with the additional problem of employment and access to benefits relating to a development? At one time we did have, in the territorial government, a soft arrangement on northern benefits. So, if something is going on, how do you tie into that and how do you relate it to the people of the Northwest Territories? There were some things you could get in the claim, but one of the other areas they would not negotiate was individual aboriginal specific interest in terms of employment training and areas in that regard. What was thought of in the claimant group, that if the territorial government was able to provide the management and decisions on that, that can be tied into an arrangement with the aboriginal groups. So it is not specific to the claim, but the aboriginal groups felt it was necessary to further define opportunities that would come from development when it was not in the claim.

Supplementary, Mr. Antoine.

So what you are saying it is essential that this northern accord be negotiated and completed if that is the case, because it is tied into benefits that will go to the claimant groups. If it does not go, then what happens to the benefits that hopefully will accrue to these claimant groups? Thank you.