In your opening remarks, on page 4 of 6, "I must point out to the Members that the demand on the department's capital resources in 1995-96 exceed its ability to respond to all identified infrastructure needs. We strive to respond to an increasing population and to the community governments' need to replace aging capital infrastructure when necessary and possible." In most communities, there are arenas and swimming pools and you also said one of your principles is for us to have good recreational infrastructure. You said, "This flexibility allows a community to meet their contribution by using the skills and abilities found in the community and to employ them in a project for the benefit of all residents of the community." If a community is using sweat equity, is that equity being recorded in any way? In other words, whether it is tax credit... Maybe the government has a charitable number they use to give these people exemptions for taxes. I would think that where the communities are not using those kinds of initiatives, it isn't fair to the communities that are paying money up front.

I keep referring to Providence because that is the one I know best. In Providence, in 1983, the community came out with $275,000, which is different than what happened in Fort Good Hope. Their community used a lot of unrecorded assets as their contribution. Does the Minister have a way of measuring that? I have looked through the capital, and it doesn't say anything about revenue coming from this government as part of that contribution towards capital infrastructure.

Thank you. Madam Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will let Mr. Christensen respond to Mr. Gargan's comments.

Mr. Christensen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, when Fort Providence made the large cash contribution that it did, the cost-sharing arrangement for the facility was different than it is today. With the new municipal capital assistance policy, one of the goals of the policy was to put in an arrangement whereby municipalities made a contribution to all capital infrastructure based upon their ability to contribute. At that particular time, sport and recreation facilities in the non-tax-based municipalities were the only infrastructure where communities had to make a contribution. But in bringing in the requirements for contributions, the amount of the contribution was reduced substantially.

Also, we brought in new arrangements whereby municipalities would be able to make part of their contribution through in-kind services, recognizing their inabilities to raise direct-cash revenue to make contributions towards capital projects. So it is somewhat of a different situation entirely to the situation that existed when Fort Providence made the large cash contribution to the recreation project Mr. Gargan is referring to.

Mr. Gargan.

In communities where they don't make these contributions and it isn't recorded, how do you provide that? I don't want Providence doing that kind of a thing and the same type of communities, of a similar size, are doing in-kind service without it being justified and put on the books for the equivalent amount.

Thank you. Madam Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think Mr. Christensen can respond to that better than I can.

Thank you. Assistant deputy minister, Mr. Christensen.

Mr. Chairman, once the project has been designed and is ready for construction, there is a meeting of our department, Public Works and the municipal council and this would also take place with Fort Providence for projects

they would be undertaking. There would be a decision made as to how the municipality would go about making their contribution; in cash, or in-kind. Those aspects of the project that would be undertaken through in-kind services would be valued up front at the beginning of the project. There would be a value placed on that contribution, the cash equivalent of in-kind services, and that would be credited towards the contribution that was owing from the community to the project.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Gargan.

Okay, if it is recorded, it isn't in this capital book, is it? Where would that be recorded, or could you provide that information?

Thank you. Mr. Christensen.

Mr. Chairman, the recovery amounts that are shown in the capital book refer to the total contribution and doesn't distinguish between in-kind and cash contributions. It would be recorded in correspondence between the department and the municipality. If there was a particular project that was of interest, we could certainly provide that information.

The decision on projects to be undertaken in the next fiscal year may not be concluded at this point. That kind of a decision may still be under some discussion between ourselves, the Department of Public Works and the municipalities involved.

Thank you. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you. This year's capital allocation for gyms, community assembly buildings, community halls and arenas are all here. I understand that they might not show this year, but they probably will be showing next year. So, what happens to the other services provided the year before? Would that be provided?

Last year, for example, I think it was Fort Good Hope, McPherson... There were a bunch of communities that had revenues recovered, or something to that effect. Why don't we see any in that category this year?

Thank you. Madam Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are keeping track of it for this fiscal year. We have records.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Gargan.

Do you have the recovery of revenues for last year then, for capital expenditures that were made last year?

Qujannamiik. The honourable Minister.

Mr. Chairman, in Fort Norman, for example, the current capital cost is $10,000, this proposed estimate is $210,000 and our recoveries show $5,000. So, that is recorded.

Thank you. Mr. Gargan.