Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, the department would lapse the funds, identify the funds, the reason that it was lapsed, that the program was straddled, and then we would reissue the funds to them, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Patterson.

I would like to ask the Minister of Finance how would the funds be reissued to the department in the new fiscal year? Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

They would be issued in a similar fashion as you're seeing right now, Mr. Chairman, and they would have to come back through the Standing Committee on Finance and the House again. Thank you.

Thank you. In other words, Mr. Patterson, it goes to your committee. Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, but that would be a new supp and a separate supplementary estimate. I guess I get back to my first question, since it would require a new supp to identify the funds, which I would support, by the way, when it comes forward, wouldn't the responsible thing be to recognize that we won't spend it this year and this bill should be amended by deleting that amount? Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

I guess, Mr. Chairman, for the Minister's sake it's a lot easier for him to say I'm lapsing the funds but I'm going to need them in the next fiscal year. He has a sort of moral right to those funds, as opposed to starting from scratch again to make a submission to the Financial Management Board. Where priorities change over the course of a year, money gets tighter and so on and there's a lot of competition for money at the table at FMB; so by lapsing the money and saying I'm going to need it again, it gives the Minister a little bit more ground. But the process is still the same, Mr. Chairman, and if there's a need for deletion that can be done. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Patterson.

Well, I'll let it go, Mr. Chairman, because I do think it's a very worthwhile, long overdue initiative. I guess it does illustrate my point that the numbers before us, as much as possible, should be real numbers; and this number is higher than it needs to be. But I wouldn't want to deprive the Minister of his moral ground for such a worthwhile initiative. I think I've made my point. Thank you.

Thank you. We haven't changed the figure and we've wasted five minutes. Just kidding. Total department, special warrants, $368,500. Agreed?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Thank you. Total department, not previously authorized, $2.309 million. Agreed?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Department Of Municipal And Community Affairs

Thank you. On page 14 of Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1994-95, Municipal and Community Affairs, operations and maintenance, lands, not previously authorized -- this is something new, this is great -- $215,000. Agreed? Mr. Antoine.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance if he could give us an explanation of the nature of this particular case regarding the GNWT and the town of Norman Wells. Thank you.

Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in 1990, legal actions were filed in the Supreme Court against us and against the town of Norman Wells by a company called Wellex Limited and Kenaston Contractors Limited. They challenged our legal capacity and the town's legal capacity to levy fees and charges for operations and administration of the Norman Wells municipal quarries. Before this, the contractors had refused to pay the town's charges and thereby accumulated a large debt which the town subsequently attempted to recover through legal actions. When the town tried to get their money back through the courts, the contractors countersued the town and they included us in the suit. There was an examination of discovery, all parties had their lawyers there. After the examination of discovery, the Department of Justice for the Government of the Northwest Territories recommended that the matter be settled out of court. You may recall that we introduced new legislation to retroactively prevent any further such lawsuits, and that was passed in this House in an act in November of 1994.

So the legal settlements negotiated between the town of Norman Wells and the complainants are as follows: Wellex received $70,000 costs for losses and damages and $30,000 for legal fees; Kenaston received $20,000 costs for losses and damages and $10,000 in legal fees. There was also some $96,133.09 accepted by the town of Norman Wells to discontinue the action against the contractors. The upshot is that it cost us $215,000 to settle that particular court case. We learned a lesson, passed some legislation and hopefully nobody can do it to us again, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you. Lands, not previously authorized, $215,000. Agreed?

Agreed.

---Agreed

Qujannamiik. Total department, not previously authorized, $215,000.

Agreed.

---Agreed