Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a number of comments. First of all, I would like to offer positive comments. I would like to publicly congratulate the Power Corporation for the realization of the Dogrib power project. It took a lot of hard work and a lot of skill in working with a number of organizations. It was very difficult, but I think it bodes well for development in the western Arctic. It was a job well done and I congratulate the Power Corporation on that particular project.

My second comment is about the rate zones and cost-based rates. I, for one, support the principle. It is important that in every area of the Northwest Territories, people know exactly how much it is to supply power. I think that knowledge should be public knowledge and, if there are to be subsidies, they should be outside the actual costs of delivering power. I agree with the principle. I will have some questions about the actual details of the zones and rates that are proposed, but I just want to indicate to the Power Corporation that I think they're definitely on the right track.

My third positive comment: I was, as I am sure other Members were, quite pleased to hear that the issue of privatization has at least been postponed. I have made a number of comments in this House, as have others, that I felt it was premature at this time, for a number of reasons, to consider the concept of privatization. I know for one thing that, at the appropriate time with the right financial conditions and the right political conditions -- perhaps not until after division -- there definitely should be a full debate on the pros and cons of privatization. I think it is an issue, as the Premier has said, that we should put aside for now because of timing, but it is one that, at the right time, merits a full debate. At that time, I think we can discuss it fully and make a decision for the right reasons.

Again, I want to congratulate the Minister for postponing it for now. There wasn't a consensus out there and, rather than having a debate which is counter-productive, I think this was a prudent decision. At the right time, I'm sure we'll reopen this particular debate.

I read also, Mr. Chairman, with some interest about possible changes to the Public Utilities Board. I, for one, am willing to look at those, but I really want to put it on the record that it is very important that the Public Utilities Board has public confidence and is acting as a regulator for power distribution for power companies in the Northwest Territories. There are ways to streamline and improve the process, but I wouldn't like to see anything done which takes away from the ability of the Public Utilities Board to protect the interests of the consumers in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Chairman, I have been on record in the last three weeks indicating my concern about the process which lead the Power Corporation to ask for a 22 per cent increase as a surcharge because of low water in Yellowknife. I have put my concerns on the record. We will wait to see what the PUB has to say about that situation, but once that decision comes down, I will sum up my concerns about this process.

Suffice it to say now, I do have some concerns about the decision-making process for that sort of a decision such as: as the power of the Cabinet and the Minister; the interaction between the Power Corporation and the Minister; and, the involvement or lack of involvement of MLAs. It is an area that bears some scrutiny in the future.

I have always agreed with the premise that the Power Corporation should be run as a business and 95 per cent of the time, that works. But for something as unusual as the low-water situation in the Snare system and for something that has such a profound impact on a relatively small number of consumers, I think perhaps we should look at a better approach to deal with that situation. At the appropriate time, I will have some more to say on this situation.

Generally, I don't have a problem with the capital budget of the Power Corporation. I think that they are attempting to deal with needs in the communities throughout the Northwest Territories. I hope, in the future, for some of the more difficult and controversial decisions that the Power Corporation will have to make, that they will find a better process of consultation and communication than they might have found in the past. With that, Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments. I will have two or three questions during the detail of the budget, but that is it for now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Dent.

Qujannamiik, Mr. Dent. General comments. Mr. Pudlat.

(Translation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not have too many comments to raise. I want to raise some issues along what the two Members have already raised. I, too, am very thankful to the Minister responsible for the Power Corporation. We have seen a big improvement. I understood that it has not always been operating that well. One of the comments I want to make is I don't want to see this privatized as yet. As the Minister responsible for the Power Corporation stated, the privatization of the Power Corporation is deferred. I am in support of this. If the privatization of the Power Corporation is going to be deferred and if we are going to wait until 1999, I would be in support of that. I have worked closely

with my constituents, especially in 1994, with regard to this issue. We all understand that the Members of the Legislative

Assembly understand and are in support of the way the Power Corporation is being operated now.

I also understand that in the near future, after the Power Corporation is privatized, we might see increases to our power rates. When this happens, we will have to look for solutions. If the Power Corporation continues to owe more money, we will have to look for solutions to this problem. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Qujannamiik, Mr. Pudlat. Any further general comments? We are reviewing the NWT Power Corporation. Mr. Antoine.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a few comments that I would like to make. It is regarding the statement the Minister made. Much of the budget for this year hasn't been approved by the board and it won't be until November. A lot of the decision is based on whether the Public Utilities Board will approve their application or not. Many things are still up in the air. From the figures in this document, it states that in 1993-94, the corporation made a profit of $9.363 million. From this profit, the corporation paid the government a dividend of $3.48 million, which was redistributed in the form of a power subsidy to the northern consumers. I will have a question about this later on. The remaining $5.88 million went to new capital projects. However, the forecast for this year, 1994-95, indicates that the profit is going to be forecast at $4.8 million, which is about 50 per cent less than what was earned last year. As a result of that, if you take the -- I don't know whether the government is going to get a dividend this year or not -- $3.48 million off the profit, which was given last year, that leaves only $1.32 million for new capital projects.

Up front, the Minister is saying that the budget calls for an expenditure of $20 million to $24 million. I take it that a lot of that will be in the O and M part of the budget. In the 1993-94 statement, with a profit of $9.36 million, it will be interesting to know what the total operating costs of the corporation were, to realize a profit of this amount.

The other thing is, if this current year's profit is going to be $4.8 million, would the corporation still pay the government a dividend from that and how much would it be? Would that dividend be applied to the power subsidy for northern consumers? Would that dividend be enough to cover all the power subsidy that is offered to northern consumers? Is the $3.4 million the total amount for power subsidy to northern consumers? Could the Minister answer those questions, Mr. Chairman?

Qujannamiik. Madam Premier.

Mr. Chairman, there are many questions that have been made in general comments and we will try to keep a running tab of them. For the specific question that Mr. Antoine made in terms of dividends and the breakdown of the expense, we indicated that the budget calls for expenditures of about $20 million to $24 million. That is all-inclusive on capital.

Some of the capital expenses are paid for by loans or debt financing, so it is not totally reflected in the profit margin that we are allowed to make. In terms of the dividend, the Government of the Northwest Territories can request any amount. The bigger the request is, the less there is to make on expenditures on other things, such as upgrades and plants. So the subsidy amount is generally the one that is requested from the Power Corporation.

If there is anything else, perhaps Mr. Robertson can elaborate.

Thank you. Mr. Robertson, would you like to take it from here?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are just a few questions that are outstanding. The amount of the dividend that was requested, as far as we know, covers 100 per cent of the subsidy. The $3.4 million that was paid last year, again, as far as we know, covered off all the subsidy payments required.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Antoine.

One question that wasn't covered was this presentation states that the budget calls for an expenditure of $20 to $24 million for this year, 1994-95. This will make the profits drop by $4.8 million. I wanted to know what the total operating costs were from 1993-94 to realize a profit of $9.360 million for that year.

Thank you. Madam Premier.

Mr. Chairman, we did table the financial statement for the Power Corporation. I will have Mr. Courneya answer the detail of the question.

Thank you. Mr. Courneya.

The information the Member is looking for would be contained in the income statement in the annual report, which would give the total operating costs for 1993-94. The estimated capital expenditures for 1994-95 do not directly impact on our expected net income for the 1994-95 year, as the capital expenditure program is not directly related to the O and M expenses or the net income of the corporation.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Antoine.

The tabled document that they refer to was tabled and it would be good if I could get a copy of that. Members don't receive tabled documents unless they ask for them, so I am asking for it now.

I'm satisfied with the answers for now. I will look at the document when I get it, Mr. Chairman. I just want to carry on with my general comments on the Power Corporation. A lot of the capital expenditures are still outstanding, as I said, because of a lot of outstanding issues. The board hasn't approved the capital; they expect to do it in November. Plus, there are two proposals before the Public Utilities Board that will probably determine changes in the financial picture of the Power Corporation.

One of the items that the Standing Committee on Finance requested is information on projects that are $250,000 and over. The corporation knows that we requested this; I just wanted to remind them that we are still looking forward to that.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to say that the only time people at the community level deal with the Power Corporation is when they pay their bills. There are still outstanding problems in the communities I represent, especially in Fort Simpson. This past year, there were some problems with the management of that operation. The Minister said they were there to work with the communities and I'm glad to hear that because the manager of the station in Fort Simpson took an early retirement because he was having a lot of problems with headquarters.

This man spent 33 years of his life working with this corporation, and to finish working for them that way is not a good way to work with people in the community. Everybody in the community knows this person and the feeling is that he wasn't treated very well. I don't know what the president or the Minister said to him, but usually when somebody retires, there is usually some sort of celebration or award. Certainly, when someone dedicates 33 years of his life to a corporation, he deserves something other than taking an early retirement because of the stress headquarters is putting him under.

I just wanted to tell the corporation that they are going to have to start working a lot better with the people in the communities and start treating people in the communities who are working for the corporation a lot better than they have. That is the experience we have had in Fort Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Madam Premier.

Mr. Chairman, with regard to the individual issue, the Member is correct in saying that the person is having his own problems. However, he is still working for us. He's still on the job. When his retirement takes place, he will be treated like every other employee. I would like to say very clearly that the Power Corporation does have retirement parties and long-service awards, even more than this government has.

Many past employees, when they worked for the federal Crown, were basically left in the interior and not taken any notice of, and were given very little compensation for their services. The Power Corporation has a very good reputation for recognizing its employees and trying to do the right thing by them, whether they are carry-over employees or whether it is looking after the families when there is a grey area. This individual will be recognized for his service, just like we do for others.

I know the chairman of the board and the new president, in view of their past work with employees, have a very good record. I just want to assure the Member that once a retirement takes place, there will be proper recognition of the service that the individual provided. He is still at work, so we will do that at the appropriate time. This corporation, to my knowledge, goes a long way in trying to say thank you when thank you is due.

Thank you. General comments. We have Mr. Pudlat, Mr. Patterson and Mr. Koe. Mr. Koe, I have you on the list first.

Mahsi, Mr. Chairman. I have a couple of comments on the statement the Minister made. I take exception to the comments made on page 6 about the Standing Committee on Agencies, Boards and Commissions and their inability to schedule hearings. The Standing Committee on Agencies, Boards and Commissions, which I chair, will take criticism where it is rightfully due. In this case, I think the comments are a bit unwarranted, in the sense that meetings were set up, but it is an issue that concerns all Members of the Assembly and there are other standing committees that made suggestions that hearings be rescheduled. For various reasons, they didn't proceed.

I would just like to state that it wasn't solely because of the inability of the Standing Committee on Agencies, Boards and Commissions that we did not have the hearing. I'm not sure what the qualification at the end means: "...the consensus territorial-wide..." You are the one who travelled the north and talked to different people. I believe you probably have a better sense than I would on what the consensus was, but through my contacts, I know there wasn't consensus in the north on the concept of privatization. But, it is not because we couldn't schedule our hearings that that consensus wasn't reached. And it wasn't because of our inability to schedule hearings that we didn't receive consensus in this House.

On other issues, I have some concerns about some of the policies used by the Power Corporation, and these aren't new. There are two basic concerns, the buy north and hire north policies. I still hear in my travels across the north about the Power Corporation not using as many northern goods and services as they should. I don't have any concrete evidence to say that they are or they aren't, but you hear it from suppliers and on the street. I want the Minister, if she can, to confirm that the buy north, hire north policies, and the BIP are used by the Power Corporation.

Thank you. Madam Premier, do you have any response?