We will eagerly look forward to the results of that meeting and positive reports from the Minister at the next session of the Legislature, if not before. Am I correct that the Minister, in addition to his good offices, does have the authority to provide policy direction to the boards to accomplish worthwhile agreed-upon goals like the one that I am discussion this afternoon? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Patterson. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, and once we have an indication of the general direction and we are satisfied that the general strategies that have been proposed are complementary and supportive, we will address the issues that have been raised. I am hoping that the strategic plans will address the concern. In fact, in my view, because of the letters that I have received from the chair of the Nunavut Arctic College, I think that some of these issues will be resolved at the joint meeting, because the boards are jointly meeting. They have resolved a number of the other financial issues and it is my view that they will probably address this whole issue and resolve it as well. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Nerysoo. Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Chairman, this is positive news. I am looking forward to those developments. I would just like to clarify here, Mr. Chairman; even though I am the Member for Iqaluit, I would like to think that I am looking at the picture of trades training in Nunavut, and I want to mention that I know that a lot of good work has been undertaken under the leadership of Michael Schouldice in Keewatin to develop a trades training plan. There is excellent support in that region. I would hope that would be one of the first places that we would look to in Nunavut to get trades training going. I would like to express my support for that initiative from that region and make it clear that I am not just looking at it from a parochial point of view.

Mr. Chairman, I just have a few more questions on the college, I don't want to monopolize the floor.

(Microphone turned off)...else with their hand up, Mr. Patterson, so proceed please.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn to the environmental technology programs. I made a statement the other day about this. I would really like to ask the Minister, I know this was a college board initiative, but what on earth is going on here with this articulation of programs.

I am getting a clear impression from people I talk to, who care about the environmental technology program that has been established in Nunatta Campus, that they are really feeling that this report and the initiative of the Arctic College is to confine the environmental technology program; to force them to develop courses in common with the renewable resource technology program, which is a different program, serving a different constituency in a different region. And they are feeling quite hamstrung, because what they want to do is respond to the Nunavut land claim, the wildlife management and land management training challenges that are emerging from the implementation of that claim.

Here this study is going on which is saying they are going to now have one common name, they will have 18 out of 22 courses that are going to be in common. What on earth is the motivation for this? Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister, shouldn't we be allowing each program to flourish and evolve; one towards the Arctic marine, one toward forestry and in the Delta -- I don't know much about that program but it would seem to me that would be another different constituency that would have different needs, maybe a blend of both, I don't know. But I cannot understand why this is happening and I wonder if the Minister shares my concerns and agrees that the purpose of creating two colleges was to allow programs to evolve to meet the needs of different regions. Why does this study seem to point us in the direction towards cloning our programs. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Patterson. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just so, Mr. Chairman, there is no confusion, the problem with having given a report of this particular type to my colleagues and management reports generally, is that in some cases we don't always agree with the consultants and we have not made any final conclusions. That is the problem about providing management reports. What we were trying do, basically, is to provide a report and give you an analysis of the information that has been brought forward.

I want to say to the honourable Member that we are examining the report. There have been no final decisions/determinations on the recommendations. The other component is that, based on the information, there is potential for amalgamation of programs or subjects that are being taught that can be similar. Some basic information gathering: research; biology; whatever those basics are, I think they can be consistent. Where it may differ is in the detailed work, whether you are in marine biology or in boreal forests. So in that sense, Mr. Chairman, I still think we have an opportunity to review the final environmental technology program and have a discussion with both Aurora College and Nunavut Arctic College and then conclude our decisions about that program.

The other components are one, whether or not there are certificates for that program and two, whether it is a diploma program. Some provide for certificates maybe after one year and a diploma after two years. Those are the kinds of things we have to consider. No final decisions have been made.

Thank you, Mr. Nerysoo. Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Chairman, there was to have been a joint articulation committee established according to the consultant's recommendations. I understand that Nunatta Campus representatives have withdrawn from this committee

and I would like to ask about the status of the committee, especially if half the participants have withdrawn.

Thank you, Mr. Patterson. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I'm not clear on the status of that situation. It is generally an internal matter. I will revisit that matter when I meet with the boards and ask them to clarify whether or not that issue has been resolved and maybe make some recommendations as to how it may be resolved.

Thank you. Before I recognize Mr. Patterson again, is there anybody else who would like to get in on this item, culture and careers, total O and M, $70.93 million? Okay, Mr. Patterson, carry on.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. In that point, I think I've made my views clear, I hope they will be considered, and I'll leave it at that. My feeling is that the articulation committee is not working and there are good reasons for that. Mr. Chairman, in response to written questions that I asked, I was very pleased to get the Minister's response about the levels of funding which would be available for the environmental technology training program. In the written response he said, referring to the RRTP program at Thebacha Campus and the environmental technology program at Nunatta Campus: "For 1995-96, an estimated $340,000 is allocated to each college to support this program. This includes funding for three positions. As well, college east receives an additional sum as a result of cost differential." I guess that is now Nunavut Arctic College, I should correct myself.

I was quoting from the written response, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to say that I was pleased with this response. Am I correct that sum mentioned in the Minister's return to written question represents an increase in funding over previous years? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Patterson. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you. I would like to ask Mr. Gerein to respond to that question.

Mr. Gerein.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. What is reflected, Mr. Chairman, in the return the honourable Minister made was the actual allocations that would be attributed to this program as base funding through the college funding allocation program. The amount that the college actually chooses to spend on a program is a decision by the board. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Gerein. Mr. Patterson.

Well, Mr. Chairman, I guess that explains, perhaps, why I have different information about what was actually spent. For example, the Avery Cooper consultant's report on the review of these programs states on page (i) that in 1993-94, RRTP had a budget of $406,000 and spent $475,000 and the ETP program had a budget of $293,000 and spent $264,000. My information about 1994-95 is that the budgets were $388,000 and $206,000 respectively for RRTP and ETP. What I'm understanding from the Minister is the sums available, as far as the department is concerned, are $340,000. Okay. I would like to ask, then, what is the additional amount referred to as "an additional sum as a result of cost differential?"

Mr. Nerysoo.

We don't have the exact figures. Maybe I could come back at another time and respond to the Member with a written response.

Thank you, Mr. Nerysoo. Is that satisfactory, Mr. Patterson? Mr. Patterson.