Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is the last budget of this Assembly, and I just wanted to make a few comments about it. First of all, I would like to congratulate the Finance Minister, Mr. John Pollard, on introducing this budget to this House. I know he and his staff have worked hard to put this together. In this time of fiscal restraint, it is a very fine balance one has to take in delivering such a budget. I would just like to say, Mr. Speaker, that Mr. John Pollard has worked very well with the Standing Committee on Finance and with different Members of this House. I would like to say that he has been upfront and doesn't hold anything back from us. I appreciate that very much. He took all the concerns that we have very seriously. However, it took him a little while before he took SCOF's advice on the package approach. I think once he adopted it, it paid off some dividends.

I don't like a deficit budget, as well, Mr. Speaker. I much prefer a balanced budget, which I have said in the House on previous occasions. The reason for that is the danger it will place on future Legislative Assemblies. It also impacts on future generations. Once we have a deficit budget, it will be very easy to slip into a bigger deficit. In the Finance Minister's Budget Address, he mentions a $40 million figure. That can be compounded very quickly into a much bigger debt, so, there's a danger in that.

With division coming up in 1999, a deficit will create a major problem, especially if we have to divide the deficit. Beginning two new territories with deficits and diminished revenue will create major problems in the future.

With that in mind, the Standing Committee on Finance has recommended a balanced budget by March 31, 1998. Yes, it will be very difficult to do, I agree. In the federal budget speech yesterday, we were told that we are going to take a major hit, something like $58 million total -- $8 million this year, and $50 million in the future -- which puts us in a great deficit position already. With that in mind, I agree it will be a tough decision to make. Tough cuts must come from the leadership of the government.

I would like to make a recommendation. The Minister said publicly that he would meet with Cabinet tonight and with the Standing Committee on Finance tomorrow morning to give us more detail on what the federal budget's impact is. I would like to suggest to him to go further and establish a consultation strategy that would allow community leaders, aboriginal organizations, chambers of commerce, social agencies, municipal governments and other people to become involved in our fiscal planning.

I say this, Mr. Speaker, because in my community travels, I have been upfront with everybody about our source of revenue, how much revenue we get from Ottawa, how much we raise on our own in the form of taxes, general revenues, program financing and transfer payments. We know about all this. Once you talk about government, you are talking about money. You need money to run governments. The source of funding is key. If we don't have the money, then we can never provide the types of programs and services we are here to provide to the people who put us here.

It's important to be upfront with the people of the communities, not to hold anything back, and to get them involved in this process. I think it is going to be tough enough for the government on its own, or for all of the Members here in the Assembly, to decide where we should make cuts. I think people in the communities have heard we are going to be making cuts and I think they should be involved in some sort of consultation process. I would like to make that recommendation here to this government and specifically to the Minister of Finance.

Over the last couple of years, we've already taken a $49 million hit from the federal government, in the form of cutbacks to the housing program. So, we might be able to manage $58 million if we put our heads together and try to figure out how we can deal with it in the future.

In the Finance Minister's Budget Address, he made a comment that the economy is well and that it has grown over the past years. I'm certain that it will grow even bigger in the future with the diamond mines that are potentially going to open in the north. We are going to have an opportunity to perhaps generate revenue from that. I applaud the Minister responsible for Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, who is working hard to try to get the aboriginal organizations together on the northern accord so important resources are under the control of northerners. I think everybody who is at the table is sincere in their belief that important revenue resources should be controlled by northerners. People in the north have to control this. In the last few days when we have dealt with EM&PR, the Minister of that department commented that even if we get a northern accord, the control still remains in Ottawa. We have to do some work on that, as well.

We have been talking about a sustainable economy. I would like to get specific and talk about my constituency, Mr. Speaker; we have high potential for economic sustainability: tourism provides major income for my region. We have the Mackenzie Mountains, the Nahanni National Park and the surrounding area is equally as spectacular to tourists. The Nahanni Ram area is a world-class site. Tourism has been good in my area. People from all walks of life and countries have been there and many more want to come so it is a very important resource for us. In the budget, I noticed that there is a huge cut in the area of tourism and marketing. Over $1.5 million has been cut and I'm very concerned about the kind of impact this will have on the tourist potential in my area and in other areas in the north, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to also comment on big-game hunting, which is in my area, as well as right down the western part of the Northwest Territories in the Mackenzie Mountains. We have a lot of game there and there are big-game hunters who operate out of that zone. I certainly would like the government to look at that to see if people in the north, specifically people in the communities closest to these zones, would have opportunities to gain access to big-game outfitting in that area. Here, big dollars are spent. I think this is the only place in North America, where big game is hunted quite freely. In other parts of North America there are a lot of restrictions and people who come into that area have to pay a large sum of money to operate out of there so I'd like to see some real close investigation into this area to see if we could gain access to that important income for my area.

There's logging that is beginning in my area as well, Mr. Speaker. In Fort Liard, there were some test cuts and they were experimenting on what type of logging will be best suited for my area. As you know, in the Liard area we have a lot of forests with big trees and there's real potential there. With the high price of lumber, there's a good opportunity for people in that area to develop sustainable types of economies with the logging, as well as the potential for a sawmill in that area. With the increase in the stumpage fees, I have a problem with that because even now the people who cut wood for a living in my area as well as your area, Mr. Speaker, have a difficult time with the stumpage fees and with an increase in that and, especially for the fledgling logging economy, it's going to have a very big impact on them. Instead of charging them more to cut the trees, they should be encouraged to develop this new type of economy that has big potential in the north.