I would like to call the committee to order. We left off on Friday on contributions under Municipal and Community Affairs, page 10-37 of the main estimates. I wonder how the committee wishes to proceed. Mr. Ootes.

I would recommend, Mr. Chairman, that we continue with the departmental review of Bill 11, Appropriation Act, 1996-97, and continue with the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs.

Thank you, Mr. Ootes. Is this agreeable with the Members?

I will ask the Minister if she would like to come forward with witnesses.

If the committee agrees, we will take a 10-minute break while we prepare the witnesses.

I would like to call the committee back to order. I will ask the Minister to introduce her witnesses.

Thank you. I would like to take this opportunity to read out the chair's ruling on Committee of the Whole last week. At this time, I would like to provide my ruling on the point of order that was raised in Committee of the Whole on Friday, May 24, 1996, by the Honourable Don Morin.

Members will recall that the committee was debating the estimates for the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs and Mr. Morin raised a point of order to indicate that, in his opinion, the Member for Amittuq, Mr. Evaloarjuk, was making allegations against Cabinet Members by saying that their constituencies were receiving, and I quote, "More capital than ordinary Members' ridings. That isn't true. Capital is given out by this government on need and need only. If the Member is saying that the Ministers of this government are pork-barrelling into their riding or padding their riding, that isn't a true statement. I would like that statement taken back."

I have reviewed the unedited transcript for Friday, and would like to offer you the following comments. The rules of this House and the precedence of parliamentary procedure are clear in this regard. Beauchesne's citation 41 states that Members must not impute bad motives or motives different from those acknowledged by a Member. As well, Members must not make a personal charge against another Member.

After reviewing the unedited transcript, I find that Mr. Evaloarjuk was close to contravening our rules of order and, in fact, would likely have been called to order if the Premier had not raised his point of order as quickly as he did.

To be fair to both Mr. Evaloarjuk and the Premier, I should clearly note for the record that Mr. Evaloarjuk was speaking in Inuktitut. As the Premier pointed out, there is some question whether the translation was entirely accurate and true to Mr. Evaloarjuk's intentions. As the committee chairperson, Mrs. Groenewegen, stated at the time, it wasn't clear if Mr. Evaloarjuk was referring to speculation on capital allocations or stating this allegation as a matter of fact. Upon my review of the transcript, I must say that this point is somewhat moot.

The precedents are clear, Members must not make allegations or impute false motives against another Member. As the chairperson, Mrs. Groenewegen, said, "Members should be cautioned not to imply motives or attribute actions to Ministers which could be speculative and negative.' I could not agree more. I should also note, for the record, that Mr. Evaloarjuk did apologize for his comment.

All Members are asked to keep these rules in mind when commenting on the motives or actions of their colleagues; Ministers and ordinary Members alike. Without this mutual respect and trust, the important matters of this House cannot be dealt with in a productive manner. I trust you will agree. As Mr. Evaloarjuk has apologized for his comments, I rule that no further actions are required. Thank you.

To get back to the order on the table, we were on page 10-37, contributions, total department, $56,507. Agreed?

Page 10-38, detail of work performed on behalf of third parties, total department, on page 10-39, $1.030 million. Agreed?

We will now revert back to the items that were deferred. I believe it was on page 10-31, buildings and works, Keewatin. Does the committee agree that we move back to the item that was deferred on page 10-31, building and works, Keewatin, total region, $2.172 million? Mr. Miltenberger.

Mr. Chairman, unless there is new information, my understanding was we were going to wait until the Member was back in the House later today to deal with this specific issue.

I'll ask the committee if what Mr. Miltenberger suggested, to wait for the Member, is the wish of this House or if we should proceed. Mr. Miltenberger.

Mr. Chairman, I'm suggesting that we just leave this item deferred and continue with the rest of Municipal and Community Affairs. I understand that the Member just walked through the door and should be here momentarily.

Is that the committee's wish?

We will then move to program summary, which was deferred as well. For the Member's information, that concludes the detailed review of this department. Does the committee agree that we defer consideration of the program summary until consideration of Bill 10, Budget Measures Implementation Act, 1996-97, has been concluded?

For the Members' information, it's being suggested here that we defer. Since we did not complete the detailed review, it would not be proper to suggest that we are finished with the department and we defer. If the committee agrees, we would then proceed on to the next department. Is that the wish of the committee?