I am glad that Mr. Antoine and some other Members understood the thrust of my motion, which is that we should look at official languages programs in consultation with the organizations that care about them. We are not the only people who care about aboriginal and official languages in the territories. There are a lot of organizations which are involved, which are concerned. We should look at them all, and we should recognize that we have to start setting priorities because we don't have as much money as we used to have before.

That's what the motion is about, Mr. Speaker. It's not about official languages services in this Assembly. It's not about saying official languages should not be used in our Assembly. What it does say is we should have a thorough review of all official languages programs and we should not exempt the official languages programs that are used in this Assembly. Everything should be on the table. I think the official languages groups in the Northwest Territories would want to have input into all the programs and maybe, Mr. Speaker, just maybe, they can tell us ways in which we can make the services provided in this Assembly more accessible to people in the Northwest Territories and more effective in communicating what this government does. Maybe there are ways that the service even here can be improved.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind Members that I've been hammering away for a week, with support from other Members, about the legal interpreting program because I felt that it was unfair that cuts were made in this program in secret, by Ministers, without being accountable to the organizations and institutions served, without being accountable in this Legislature and without being accountable to the official languages organizations in the Northwest Territories. I don't think that's the way we should set our priorities, by having Ministers cherry pick, make cuts and make arbitrary decisions that we may or may not find out about at all in this Assembly.

The Premier said there was a review under way. All the motion does is recommend that this Assembly endorse the review and that it should cover all official languages programs. I do not like to see the debate characterized as being a debate about whether or not we provide simultaneous interpretation in this Assembly. The motion is about whether we review the programs, in light of the drastic cuts imposed on us by the federal government and whether we're prepared to participate and to allow the public to participate in setting priorities, in light of these dramatic funding cutbacks.

That's what the motion is about, Mr. Chairman, and I think we should look everywhere, including our own backyard. That's the simple thrust of this motion. If we don't support the motion and agree to a review, then we're surrendering authority to a few Ministers to make arbitrary cuts without looking at the total picture, and without accountability to the people who are interested in and concerned about these programs.

I think that would be retrogressive. I think Members have been frustrated, as I have, about trying to find out what's going on, wondering why cuts are made in advance of the review being completed, or wondering why cuts are being made in advance of a consultant's study that was supposed to decide how a program should be reorganized. Let's get it out in the open, let's involve the organizations that are concerned, that I know have good ideas, let's involve Members of this Assembly, and support the review that the Premier said she's already undergoing anyway. It's not a controversial motion. It's to support a review that's already under way. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.