Before I recognize Mr. Patterson, I would like to draw Members' attention to Bishop Christopher Williams, who is in our gallery.

---Applause

Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think that is the answer that the Standing Committee on Finance had wanted to get from the Minister. I would like to nail it down a bit further by asking Mr. Pollard, through you, if our prayers are answered and the fiscal situation of the Northwest Territories does improve, federal money starts to flow, the health billings dispute is settled in our favour, if the financial situation improves, I take it then that Mr. Pollard is willing to go on record as saying that as a responsible Minister of Finance he would come back and have this authorization maximum reduced through a legislative change. Is that correct?

Mr. Pollard.

Mr. Chairman, I will go even further than that. I would be prepared to come back with a bill and have it rescinded and then forecast what we would need the next year if we had to borrow money. I would be prepared to come back and ask to rescind the bill or drop the amount down to $1 to keep the bill alive and only come back to the House and asked for what we need next year. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Pollard. General comments. Mr. Ningark.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Finance mentioned a number of things that are a factor in the system having to borrow more money than anticipated. One of those things is that the streamlining initiative is not working or is too slow. A second one is amalgamation is not working as anticipated or the process is too slow. Maybe one of the factors in incurring more money than we expected is the fact that we have to invest in a new legislature. Those may be just temporary. Perhaps somewhere down the road, we should be seeing a turn around to our advantage. Is one of the factors of having to borrow more than we expected because of the system having to put money into the new Legislative Assembly building, maybe streamlining is not working as we expected or perhaps the amalgamation process is too slow. What are the factors in the

system causing us to borrow more money than we expected? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ningark. Mr. Pollard.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Over the last ten years, if you take our budgets over that time, they have been balanced. We have used our surplus cash in different ways. We finance our loan fund out of our surplus cash. As we get closer and closer and start going into debt, the amount of surplus cash we have available to us to cover dry periods, such as we are going through right now, becomes less. I think what the Member is asking is are we streamlining and cutting back on our budgets or are we incurring large expenditures at one time that are going to affect the amount of cash we have in the bank. I guess there is a bit of all those things in there. If we are going to continue to balance our budgets, and at the same time we want to increase the service to people in the Northwest Territories, there is only so much you can take out of the system by streamlining. There is only so much efficiency you can get out of the system.

The only other way to do it is to increase our revenues. I don't have to tell you that increasing revenues might mean putting up taxes or increasing service fees. There are other ways to look at this issue. We receive $860 million from Ottawa each year and they would like to cut back on that amount. I don't think that is a secret. We know there is a perversity factor so when we do get volume increases in the Northwest Territories, we don't get all of those volume increases coming to us. If you say to people we are going to raise your taxes, they get worried and I don't think there is a Member in this House who wants to go out and do that at the present time.

The other way to do it is for us to recognize that Canada is short of funds and to convince Canada, if they were to eliminate the perversity factor in the formula, that would allow us to go ahead with development in the Northwest Territories. I think Mr. Todd has made some eloquent statements and speeches lately in this House and outside of this House with regard to potentials that are virtually on our doorstep. I think the answer is we have to convince the federal government to drop the perversity clause in our agreement and then allow for the orderly development of the Northwest Territories economy so we can become more self-sufficient and we won't be sitting here saying, Ottawa has cut back on us again and we don't have the money to cover the bank draft. I think that is the answer. We have to expand our economy to become more self-sufficient and not have to dance to the Ottawa tune every time it is played. That is my personal feeling, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Pollard. Mr. Ningark.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I am a bit concerned if we increase the authorization to borrow money for the system, we might get carried away and want to spend because we have the authority to borrow money. I'm not saying that government Ministers, MLAs and employees are travelling in style, but if we keep increasing the authority to borrow money, then perhaps we might get carried away and borrow more money.

If there's a real need to go ahead with programs in the system for the benefit of those people who really need them at the community level in the areas of education, social services and the other wonderful things we do for people who need them, then I have no problem. If, in fact, we know we're going to get $55 million, we borrow that money now and within two to six months we get that money from the government, I have no problem. But, if we don't really have the assurance that money will be given to us, then I'm a little bit leery of this request. But, again, as I said before, if there is a real need for it, so be it. Thank you.

I don't know if there was a question there, it was just a point, I think. Mr. Pollard.

Well, the Member raises a good point, Mr. Chairman, and that is, the differentiation between this bill, which allows us to borrow money to meet the requirements of the government and the expenditure pattern and the budgets that have been approved by this Legislative Assembly, when they passed the O and M and capital budgets previously. The things to look at are the bills before the House that deal with capital and O and M spending. That is the limit that this Legislative Assembly sets upon the government for its spending powers. This is merely to meet those obligations that this Legislative Assembly has already passed. So, it is not going to be the tempting issue where we have another $50 million that we can go out and spend. This does not authorize any extra spending, over and above what this Legislative Assembly has approved in either the capital or O and M budgets before this House, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Pollard. Are you concluded, Mr. Ningark? Okay. Mr. Ballantyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, this particular bill doesn't give me cause for alarm. I think the Minister has presented quite a balanced explanation of the bill. I think it should be clear to all Members that what we are talking about here is our short-term borrowing needs. Though on one day in March, at the very worst, we have to borrow $96 million, in April, that is not the case. So, this is very different than a long-term debt and I think the Minister explained that quite well.

The other point that the Minister made is that it is a red light, it's a warning light. It is something we should take notice of, not getting really alarmed about, but as, year by year, we eat into our accumulated surplus, this becomes more and more of a reality. We don't have the leeway we've had in the past. I have no problem supporting this bill. It doesn't give me a great cause for alarm, but I think we should be all very aware of the fact that the trend, if it continues, could give us problems in the future.

I do have one question for the Minister. The Standing Committee on Finance expressed some concern over the reorganization of the Department of Finance and the Financial Management Board and the role of the Comptroller General as secretary of the Financial Management Board. We notice that in this bill, there has been a change in responsibility from the Comptroller General to the deputy minister of Finance. Perhaps the Minister could explain that change. Is it in any way a small effort to try to redress the balance? Thank you.

Mr. Pollard.

Mr. Chairman, this is another one of the changes we have to make after making the large change to the responsibilities. In this particular instance, the responsibility clearly lies with the Department of Finance and clearly lies with the deputy minister of Finance and so the Comptroller General's name is being taken out of this bill. Finance is gaining a little back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Any other general comments? Are you ready to go clause by clause?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause By Clause

Bill 14, clause 1.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 2.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause 3.

Agreed.

---Agreed