Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Bill 8 has had second reading.

---Carried

Accordingly, the bill stands referred to a committee.

--- Applause

Item 19, consideration in committee of the whole of bills and other matters: Bill 1, Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1994-95; Minister's Statement 5-12(5), Session Business; Tabled Document 1-12(5), Towards An NWT Mineral Strategy; Tabled Document 2-12(5), Building and Learning Strategy; Tabled Document 3-12(5), Towards a Strategy to 2010: A Discussion Paper; Tabled Document 11-12(5), First Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner of the NWT for the year 1992-93, with the honourable Member for Yellowknife South, Mr. Whitford, in the chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. From the opening report that I made for the Standing Committee on Finance, there are two recommendations that I would like to read at this time.

The first recommendation is, I move that the committee recommends that the Financial Management Board direct all government departments to review and report progress on all of the definitive objectives contained in the 1994-95 main estimate documents. These reports should be provided to the Standing Committee on Finance one week prior to commencement of the review of the 1995/96 Main Estimates. Further, the committee recommends that all future main estimates documents contain the status report of departmental accomplishments in relation to its definitive objectives for the fiscal year preceding the one under review. Thank you.

Question.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Recommendation number two, I move that the committee recommends that all departments and government as a whole develop a priorized list of planned initiatives, with descriptions of the type and availability of resources required and realistic time frames required for implementation for the fiscal year 1994-95. The committee recommends that the departmental response be available to the committee prior to departmental budgets being reviewed in committee of the whole. The government-wide response should be provided prior to concluding the review in committee of the whole.

The committee recommends further that in the future main estimates documents, major initiatives should be contained in each department's definitive objectives. The Standing Committee on Finance should receive, one week prior to its review, the main estimates and an analysis of the resources and time required for all major initiatives being proposed for the fiscal year under review. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to briefly comment on the motion. I know that sometimes Ministers have been heard to quietly suggest that Members on this side create unnecessary work. This is not an example of that, I believe, because the departments have already put together their definitive objectives. These are a relatively new creature. They didn't always used to be presented with departmental estimates. But each department has put them together, and I'm sure they are put down in writing in the budget because the departments believe they can accomplish those definitive objectives and are serious enough about doing it that they're willing to have them published.

So, Mr. Chairman, I think all the motion is basically saying is since every department has put these definitive objectives down in black and white, and undoubtedly must have a strategy for carrying them out and an estimate of how much resources are required -- or they wouldn't have put them in there -- then it's certainly not a difficult task to ask that we get that strategy and the resources and the timetable presented to us along with the department's estimates.

We think that this work will have already been done. It's just a matter of having it in place so as to provide for a really thorough presentation of the budget. I just want to make those comments, Mr. Chairman. I think it's reasonable and, I think at least for departments that are well prepared, this should simply be a matter of sharing with us strategies that are already in place. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, on this recommendation -- and I realize it's a recommendation -- it says, "the government as a whole develop a priorized list of planned initiatives, with descriptions of the type and availability of resources required and realistic time frames required for implementation."

Mr. Chairman, we generally have an idea of what it's going to take, as long as we can be assured that the Members asking for this additional information recognize that some issues are not really always within just the planning of Cabinet. For example, on the committee on division, the resources which would be required to deal with that would be something that is developed along the way as we go. As long as there's a recognition that in areas such as this, it's difficult sometimes to know the exact resources that would be required. Just as long as that is understood. Thank you.

One of the concerns the committee had as we went through each of the departments was a truly amazing number of initiatives. Most initiatives are good. Most of them have a constituency that really wants to see the initiatives accomplished. It's always difficult to choose, politically, between a lot of compelling issues.

The problem, though, as the committee sees it is that the government does not have the critical mass, it doesn't have the people power to do them all. What invariably happens in any government -- and this has been true right across the country -- if you try to do too much you do everything poorly, or you only get half of them done. So the feeling is -- especially with the new centralized structure you have now -- that there has to be a better fettering system. The Premier and the Minister of Finance have to work together with the Ministers and the other departments and decide how many of these major initiatives can the government have any chance of undertaking. The list, here, goes on for pages. It's the committee's feeling that it would be absolutely impossible. You're going to paralyse yourself as a government by trying to do too much. This, hopefully, is a way for the government to take a little bit of a vote and impose some discipline on itself as to the number of achievable priorities. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The budget for the Department of the Executive is quite different than it was last year.

As a result of reorganization, the budget has increased from $17.8 million and 152.6 person years in 1993/94 to $57.3 million and 327.4 person years.

It includes spending plans for the Executive Offices, the Ministry of Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs and the expanded Financial Management Board Secretariat.

My remarks will deal with the budget of the Executive Offices. Mr. Kakfwi and Mr. Pollard will be appearing before the committee to deal with their portions of the Executive Department budget.

The Executive Offices' portion of the budget is $10.4 million and 97.1 person years, a decrease of about $3 million and 30.5 person years.

The major reason for this:

1) The Audit Bureau has been transferred to the Financial Management Board Secretariat;

2) The Bureau of Statistics has been moved to the Department of Finance; 3) The Science Institute has moved to Education, Culture and Employment;

4) The Protocol Office is being closed, future protocol requirements will be dealt with through the utilization of existing resources in the department and the Legislative Assembly;

5) Salaries for four government liaison offices are being shared with other departments, particularly Social Services and Renewable Resources, to reflect more accurately how they are utilizing their time; and

6) The Executive Council Grants program has been replaced by a new policy in the Ministry of Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs to support the provision of grants and contributions to aboriginal organizations.

While implementing these changes, the department has been able to generate further savings through internal efficiencies. Reductions in ongoing lease costs due to purchase of office equipment such as facsimiles, copiers and computers, no longer requiring rental facilities for session and program redesign have contributed to this exercise.

The presentation of the remaining functions has also changed significantly. Where there were once ten activities, there are now three. They consist of the Commissioner's office, the Ministers' offices and the Executive Council Secretariat. This involved the consolidation of many small activities, but did not involve any staff reduction at either headquarters or in the regions. It is anticipated that it will lead to better coordination within the Executive Offices' budget.

In the past years, the Department of the Executive was sub-divided too many ways and was responsible for a variety of tasks and activities tacked on over the years. To better focus attention on managing the government's agenda, setting priorities and monitoring implementation, the department has been pared down. I believe this will help over the coming months as the government will bring forward new initiatives in the areas of income reform, employment, economic and renewable resource development, deficit reduction and housing. As Members are aware, the GNWT is being driven to overhaul many programs in response to federal cutbacks and off-loading, so more time will be devoted to communicating with the public so that they understand our position and direction.

Some issues of importance that fall directly under the responsibility of the Government Leader, and which are in the budget before the committee, are Status of Women and Official Languages.

As Members are aware, the Canada/Northwest Territories cooperation agreement for French and aboriginal languages expires at the end of the fiscal year. The renewal process has begun and the GNWT has submitted a proposal to the federal government for a five year agreement which will take us up to division.

The focus of the GNWT proposal for aboriginal languages is the increasing role for communities in language matters and support to community-based initiatives. As in past years, the GNWT is seeking 100 per cent funding for the provision of French language services, as required under the Official Languages Act.

There have been concerns raised about the management of the current agreement, particularly with respect to lapsed dollars. The GNWT is addressing these concerns through many avenues, including the renewal process. We are seeking a much more flexible agreement to avoid administrative requirements which contributed to the unacceptable level of lapsed funding by several departments.

As the federal government has not responded to the GNWT proposal, the official languages budget includes only Vote 1 resources of $175,000 and 1.6 person years. Once we have received a response from Ottawa, an update will be provided to the Legislative Assembly regarding the anticipated levels of vote 4 funding.

A priority for the Official Languages Unit will be the drafting of directives to ensure that languages programs and services are available where appropriate and that resources are used effectively.

The completion of the analysis of the assessment and the evaluation will be required prior to many key directives being drafted. The information will be critical to the drafting of directives such as those related to designated offices, designated areas, interpretation services and language proficiency.

An update of the progress of the official languages directives manual will be provided before the end of this session of the Legislative Assembly and in conjunction with the government's response to the Languages Commissioner's first report.

The fiscal year 1994-95 will also see continued close cooperation between the government and women's groups. The special advisor on women in the GNWT will be working with the Status of Women Council, the Native Women's Association, Pauktuutik and the relevant departments in the areas of family law, day care, violence against women and women and health. To strengthen the link between these groups, all financial support for women's groups totalling $528,000 is now located in the special advisor's budget.

Two key priority areas which are being coordinated through the department but which do not have resources specifically tied to them will be division and departmental consolidation.

Background work on the organizational and administrative matters relating to division are being coordinated by a steering committee of deputy ministers and one internally funded staff person. No incremental resources are included in the budget as the level and type will be determined only once Caucus has decided upon how we will be approaching division issues, and how the government could be of most assistance in meeting our obligations and creating two new territories.

Mr. Chairman, once the mechanism on division has been established by the Assembly, it will be possible to sit down and coordinate a joint approach to the issues by the legislative and executive branches of government. This strategy will ensure that we, the elected representatives of the NWT public, will set the priorities for the new territories rather than have them set by people living in southern Canada.

Similarly, no incremental resources for consolidation are being asked for. Work is being done internally and by the affected departments. With regard to the Health and Social Services amalgamation, the comments of the special committee are being carefully reviewed and the government's plan for consolidation will be contained in the response to be tabled in Assembly this session.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks. Thank you.