Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would then suggest that some form of policy should be in place to encourage them to use better discretion. I refer particularly to a case recently in Tuktoyaktuk where one person was charged with aggravated assault for stabbing another person. The person who did the stabbing charged the other fellow with hitting him with a bottle and breaking the bottle over his head. Both cases went to court. One went to judge and jury. I believe the jury found him not guilty. I am sure both of them are wondering what ever happened there. They were both found not guilty. I believe between the two of them, they are sure that something happened. If the RCMP were allowed to use discretion as far as laying charges, maybe there wouldn't have been any charges at all. In the end, these two people shook hands in court. This cost the taxpayer a lot of money to fly those judges and those lawyers back and forth. In the end, nothing came of it. Those people went home happily.

This is a good indication that our system is not really all that effective. I dare say from the point of view of lawyers, it is very effective. It supplies a good living. From the point of view of the taxpayer, it is costing us a lot of money and we have to find a better system whereby the RCMP who are involved would have the ability to make judgements there and have some kind of political back-up that these decisions are going to stick. This would solve a lot of our costs.

Mr. Chairman, I don't bring these things up lightly. I have been a justice of the peace for 15 years. I know there were many cases in front of me in my court. The RCMP would have been just as happy if it had never come to court. On the advice or the authority of the prosecutor, they did go to court. I believe that if we look back in our records of the Territories, you will find that years back when the RCMP had more authority, there was much less crime and fewer repeat offenders. There was more success in the outcome of the court cases. That is my own opinion. I tend to support that opinion very strongly. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Regarding the camp to be established in Aklavik; has that been put off indefinitely?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So you are saying the money is still in the budget, but that project has been postponed? Are the resources still in the budget?

We are going to be here until the first week of June, so don't rush it. Regarding the question of the facilities, your predecessor did give me some assurances that this project was going forward. I find it confusing that you, as the new Minister, have made the decision on your own or

did you receive direction from the previous Minister on exactly what has happened in that case? I did have assurance that this project was going forward.

Basically, the direction that you're going is based on the direction of the Social Programs committee, yet the dollars are still within the budget. Have there been any contribution agreements made with the community of Aklavik as to where this stands, or what correspondence has taken place? Are there any agreements in place for this project? This has been in the works for several years and, at this stage, it seems that it's kind of ironic that your predecessor supports the initiative, yet the Social Programs committee gave you direction that they didn't have a problem with the first round but now it seems that it's coming back to the budget and the resources are still there to carry out this project. I find it kind of confusing. Was this a personal decision?