Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, if I could respond to Mr. Picco's comments first. The Member from Iqaluit sounded like he was recommending that the Minister move to force the amalgamation of boards very quickly. We have to recognize that, having granted a level of autonomy to the regions and the regional structures, we have to work through what the future changes might be. As Mr. Ningark has alluded to, there is a concern in the regions about forcing that amalgamation. I know that the NIC report recommended that there be one board but the NTI response to that was very critical of the one-board approach. I understand that the NIC is subsequently re considering their approach.

We have to allow the people in the Nunavut region to get a handle on what they see as being the best approach and to work with them to make sure that that happens. The Member may not know that the three boards have, in fact, jointly commissioned a study to see if there are ways in which they can effectively work together while maintaining their own independent representation. The boards themselves have taken this on. I think that it's a good planning exercise but we have to let that sort of thing take its course. I think I heard in the committee report that it's essential that communities drive how they take control of the agenda. This is one way in which I would be reluctant, as Minister, to jump in and remove the level of autonomy that we have achieved with boards and force a solution. The boards have demonstrated that they are looking for solutions to cut down their costs and we have to let them have some time to do that.

In terms of consolidation at headquarters, as recommended by Mr. Picco; if you take a look at the budget, you'll see that the biggest cut was, in fact, taken at headquarters. The biggest cuts were taken there. The goal has been to keep as much money as possible in programs and to cut the administration as much as is possible along the way. In terms of cancelling capital projects; in fact, the cut from $35 million a year in capital projects to $25 million a year is an ongoing one. We are going to have less money to deliver the projects than what we had when previous five-year plans were out there. We are going to have to take a look at cancelling capital projects, I guess, but at this point in time, the projects are being deferred because it was the feeling that those projects, if they had got into the five-year capital plan in the first place, were justified. We are going to have to, given the magnitude of the reduction to our capital plan, re-examine every single project. The Member can be assured that, as the department comes forward with capital projects, each one of them will have to pass new standards as to whether or not they should proceed, based on the amount of funding that we have.

The Member has my assurance that if we have built opulence into our projects that shouldn't be there, we will be taking that out. The construction of projects has changed in the past few years; the way that schools are constructed. At one point in time, it was felt that schools without windows would be the best way to go. Our thinking has changed significantly on that and the effect that natural light may have on the ability to learn in certain circumstances. I'm not sure that adding windows necessarily adds to the cost of the buildings, but the Member can be assured that if we can find examples of what he would call opulence -- in other words, I'm taking from that, frivolous design features that may increase the cost of the project without increasing the functional ability of the school or learning centre to perform its job -- we'll certainly look at taking them out.

Mr. Chairman, I think I addressed Mr. Ningark's concern about amalgamation. In response to his question about talking to the Kitikmeot board, I have, in fact, met with the Kitikmeot board. It was before the budget was issued so the discussion was somewhat general. They were given a clear understanding that we are no longer conducting business as we were before, the fiscal game has changed significantly and that, by and large, over the next three years, all boards are going to have to cover forced growth from within the dollars they are being given this year. They have been given a clear indication of what our expectation of funding is over the course of the next three years and given a chance to plan for that. All boards have received that sort of information, although it had to be in a general sense because the budget had not been tabled in this Legislature. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.