Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I would like to throw the roses first of all and congratulate the government in at least bringing a balanced budget and second accolade should go to the fact that there are no tax increases. I think there were probably many other initiatives that are very worthwhile. I think there are also some negatives with this budget.

Initial comments I have heard on the government producing a surplus of $9 million, Mr. Chairman. I would suggest that $9 million on 1.2 is more like a balanced budget than it is to a surplus. I agree with the comments that were made that a couple of mishaps during the year and you could be $9 million the other way. Something I would suggest to the government is to take a look at and prioritize projects. If they find when they are nine months into the program and we will be finishing up with at $9 million at that time the government could use that list of priorities to create some economic activity or contribute to other areas of the economy that will indeed promote job creation.

I think it acceptable to say that there have been large employee cutbacks, both in the present financial year that we are in and projections for the next financial year. I am disappointed at the method that has been used by the government in reducing the bureaucracy. I believe that dollar amounts are identified and then numbers of employees to equal that amount are produced. I think that until does take a look at programs and services that it provides, until it does that and prioritizes what programs or services that they will choose not to supply in the future, I think that is the only constructive way to handle the job lay-offs in the bureaucracy. What I would like to see and have been promoting is prioritize the program that the government should not supply further and the bureaucracy that is employed to administer those programs, they would terminate. I think that is a much better way of doing it.

I am concerned also with the cuts to the capital spending. As was noted, it is going from approximately 200 million a few years to 110 million. Some of this money is going to social programs and as I look at the social envelope we have gone from 58 percent a couple of years to 61 percent in this next fiscal year. I think it is evident that we do not have a handle on that spending.

I have concerns about the process of how the budget is dealt with. Ordinary Members, up until last Monday when the budget was introduced, have really been gagged as to receiving public input. They have been aware of many of the items that are in the budget and have had input, as has been noted, but we have not had the opportunity to receive input from our constituents on this. At the same time there has been Members of the government who have been discussing initiatives that are in the budget with some public. The Ordinary MLAs have not had the same opportunity to receive input from the public.

The Minister, in his document, has talked about this government not being able to absorb any further revenue reductions. Mr. Chairman, I believe the federal government has to be made aware that we appreciate the support over the years but without some form of a safety net, and it has been referred to as a floor, we are going to be in state of turmoil and at the whim of reduction to spendings by southern provinces.

I refer to the social spending going from 58 percent to 61.5 in this budget. I guess that begs a question, are we being better educated or healthier with this additional money. It has been noted a couple of time, I believe that this government has to put more resources into educating people and in some cases children about this government's inability to care of the number and the birthrates that we have in many of the communities. I think it is a topic that is not dealt with as straight forward as it could and should be. The Minister of Finance noted that it can get to a state where we will not have the funds to help people at all.

I listened with interest to comments from Mr. Krutko about the small amounts of capital funding that is contributed to his community. I certainly can identify with that. As I look at the 4.1 million that is received by Yellowknife in capital funding and I divide that by a population of 17,000, I get something like $241 per person. I would agree with Mr. Krutko, we certainly are in the same boat as he finds himself in.