I have a question, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I support the motion but I would like to know what the penalty is for being caught. Is there a fine schedule? Is there any way you regulate it? Is it $50, $100, $25? How is that enacted and where does that come from when you pass this legislation?

Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, I'd like to comment on Mr. Steen's comments. In order to see if a vehicle is covered in this amendment, you have to look at the definition of motor vehicle. In this particular act, allterrain vehicles are excluded. All-terrain vehicles are defined to include skidoos. Skidoos wouldn't necessarily have to have their lights on. However, it might not be a bad idea to make them have their lights on because a woman was killed in Fort Resolution this winter by a skidoo. I don't want to get into that.

As far as penalties, Mr. Picco, it depends who the person is.

--- Laughter

No. Right now, I think the act says something like the maximum penalty is $1,000, but it would be $500 under section 338 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The regulations could be instituted to have mandatory tickets, just like when you get a speeding ticket. I'm sure you can get a ticket for $15 or $25 or whatever. Is that possible, Sheila?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think I might have mislead the Member through my written note. It's $5,000 that is the maximum penalty for a breach of the act. I apologize, Roy, I didn't have my glasses on when I wrote that. It's $5,000 that is the maximum penalty. There is no minimum penalty in the act for breach of the general provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have concern with this bill. I have a highway of 20 miles. When I learn of the fees that people will have to pay, I have serious concern when we have 24 hours of daylight for four months. I understand that we have three months of darkness, too.

When people start forgetting to use their headlights back home, we're going to be pouring money into this government because we have 24 hours of daylight and we don't use headlights back home. If there is a fee or a penalty, a lot of my constituents will be paying a lot of money because of this bill. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. As I had indicated earlier, it's not a matter of whether it's bright enough to see a vehicle coming down the road, it's a matter of safety. People are often walking around, distracted, worrying about their problems: whether they have enough food at home; whether their motor boat is going to start if they're going hunting; worried about things at their job, and sometimes they're not looking where they're going, whether you're walking or whether you're driving. It's quite easy, if you're walking around, to not notice a vehicle that's coming. But if that vehicle has lights on, you notice it right away. And this is a proven fact. The study I had indicated earlier had done tests and they found that this is a proven fact.

Also, when you have 24 hours of daylight or long hours of daylight, once it starts getting dark again, people often forget to turn their lights on. I notice that around town here, that happens a lot. Once it starts getting dark ... You're used to it not getting dark, then it slowly starts getting dark earlier and earlier, but people don't turn their lights on. So I think it doesn't matter if we have 24 hours of daylight. It will increase the safety for pedestrians and particularly children and elderly people. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess the utmost responsibility of any public government, public institution, is for the well-being of the citizens of that institution. The safety of the public is the responsibility of any government in a democratic society. I think the intent of the legislation or the motion enhances that responsibility. Therefore, Madam Chair, I will support the motion. Thank you.

(Translation) Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to ask a question of Mr. Erasmus. Perhaps he can tell me how many vehicles have been involved in an accident within one year, or within two years. How many vehicles have there been involved in an accident due to not having their lights on? Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, the statistics we got from the GNWT don't indicate that. At this present time, they don't indicate whether the people who were in accidents had their lights on. But they have told me that the new accident report forms will have space on there so they will indicate whether the cars have headlights on or not. I can indicate that there was a total of approximately 800 accidents last year; and of those 800, there were approximately 550 accidents in towns, villages and communities. Out of those, 87 accidents involved pedestrians; people walking around. So that's almost one out of every six accidents that involves someone who is walking around in a town.

As I indicated earlier, one pedestrian was killed last year. That pedestrian was a nine-year-old boy who walked into the path of a water truck in Pond Inlet.

I do have a lot of statistics. If you look at this page here -although these come from Saskatchewan --where these little charts are on the top; the top chart says the total number of accidents was 26,543. The number of accidents that had no lights on was 15,494. The number of vehicles with lights on was only 665. So you can see that there's a vast, vast difference in the number of vehicles with their lights on that are involved in accidents.

Thank you, Madam Chair. That's probably what it means because they are not included in the definition of motor vehicles, so they'll be able to drive wherever they want, whether they have lights on or not.