Thank you Mr. Speaker. This is the Report of the 1996/97 Mid-Year Review for the Standing Committee on Infrastructure. As the Committee noted in its review of the 96/97 Main Estimates, the business plans of the departments in this envelope share a recurring theme of devolution. While the community empowerment initiative is the most notable undertaking in this area, devolution also encompasses the privatization of services, formerly provided by government departments, and developing user-pay systems for services still provided by government.
Generally speaking, Committee Members agree with this focus for the departments in the infrastructure envelope, and applaud the principle as well as many of the measures taken to date. However, specific concerns regarding the implementation of some of these measures were raised during the review of the business plans and budgets earlier this year. These concerns were repeated during this mid-year review. The committee believes that the devolution of services from the government to community should not take place merely for the sake of devolution itself. Transfer of powers and responsibilities should only take place where such a transfer will generally benefit those receiving the service. This will only happen when adequate preparations have taken place. Committee Members are concerned that communities are not yet ready for the profound transfers of responsibility that are planned and underway. The decisions and initiatives introduced by the government must not be arbitrary, or seen to be arbitrary. Every decision and initiative must have a sound rationale behind its introduction, with a visible implementation plan in place, and it is the government's responsibility to provide and explain those rationales to the House and to the citizens of the Northwest Territories. Much of the discussion to date has treated Community Empowerment as a motherhood issue. None of the community members will disagree that generally speaking, decision making is most effective when the decision-makers and the service providers are on the same level. However, there is more to community empowerment than mere decision making. While the principle of community empowerment is certainly worthy of open discussion, it is even more critical that the details of the government's implementation of community empowerment be subject to the open debate by the elected members of the Legislative Assembly. Committee members are concerned that the full assembly has not yet had the opportunity to engage in a full public debate and a community empowerment initiative, except for this afternoon. The Committee recommends that the government phrase, implementation of initiatives, related to community empowerment until such time as this debate this afternoon, in the public forum. Mr. Speaker, this concludes my introductory comments and our committee's report.