Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think our projected deficit without getting the audit statement which is around $12 million which is substantially reduced from our projected deficit last year. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We only have about 17 months left before division which is April 1, 1999. How much deficit will there be at that date, April 1, 1999? Thank you.

Yes, I think I made an error in my response to the first question, I better clarify it. What I meant is our projected fiscal position at the end of this year is a $9 million surplus. That is what I am saying. But there was a $12 million difference between what we have projected and what we are ending up with on the accumulated side. If, you know I

mean, one has to project financially making certain assumptions what we think the fiscal position will be on April 1, 1999. I think our original projections were somewhere around $80, $90 million of accumulated deficit. You know, I would not want to be held accountable for the number I am going to give you, but our best estimate, assuming no major catastrophes out there, would be somewhere in the range of $30 million of our accumulated deficit on April 1, 1999. That is not taking into consideration pay equity issues, we had the major forest fires that cost us millions of dollars so we had God made catastrophe, et cetera. But certainly my most optimistic numbers, that is presuming we can stay fiscally prudent which I know we will, would be about $30 million of accumulated deficit. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, myself coming in from Nunavut area just a few weeks ago, the Minister of Finance tabled Transition Action Plan for Division. In order to keep that Transition Action Plan to move forward, I think we discussed that it would need at least $136 million. Now, who will pay for that $136 million? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize but my hearing thing was not on, and I missed the last part of the question that Mr. Enuaraq asked.

Certainly, Mr. Chairman. Can you hear me now, Mr. Todd? My other question was that just a few weeks ago, the Minister of Finance tabled a document called Transition Action Plan and that is for the division to happen. Now, in order for that plan to go forward to become a reality we talked about that it would cost about $136 million. Now my question to the Minister of Finance is, who will pay that $136 million? Thank you.

Well, I will try to make my answer short, but I mean this one requires some preamble. The reality is that we believe in March, 1996, a shortfall in the original transition costs the federal government put in, in March of 1996, that was the $150 million. At that time, in fairness to the federal government, we really were not in a position, either one of us I believe, to give an accurate detailed accounting of what we thought the transition costs would be. This exercise that we did in the creation of two new territories and the transition plan, from our perspective remember, provided us with a fairly detailed hands on analysis of what we thought was necessary and what we did is cost that. We presented that plan clearly to the Interim Commissioner, as advised, and you know in his response he is going to accept it that way, but also to the federal government to identify the magnitude of the shortfall. The reality is that depending on what consensus is reached between the parties as to the appropriate course of action, to some extent that consensus will determine how much additional monies we require. When that is determined, the federal government has to pay the bill. It cannot be paid by this government. We do not have that fiscal capacity or that responsibility. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My last question, when Iqaluit was running a campaign to become a capital of Nunavut, we were told according to Footprints 2 that when Iqaluit becomes the capital that Nunavut government job positions would be decentralized to such communities such as Pangnirtung, Cape Dorset, Igloolik, Cambridge Bay, and so on. Now, can the Minister of Finance tell me in case the federal government cannot pay for $136 million, and we do realize that in order to decentralize the positions in Nunavut area, we would require at least $18 million. Can the Minister tell me in case federal government does not come up with $136 million, would the positions still be decentralized or not? Thank you.

Well you know I think the first thing is to make a general statement. None of this government has consistently supported the NIC model of a decentralized government. That has to be said upfront. I believe I did say it when we tabled the document we are clear because it was a public statement and the position of this government and continues to do that. What this report did do and has done is provide the fiscal costs attached to what we believe is moving the staff into the decentralized model. I believe that my honourable colleague is correct, it was $18 million. As I said to you, depending on what consensus is being reached in the action plan, it will determine what additional costs are required, but clearly there is a fundamental, political commitment to decentralization. Therefore, when it happens it has to be paid for and at least we have for the time being, costed what we believe it would cost to do it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question to the Minister of Finance is, and it is I believe, more for clarification, I read a report in the newspaper where the $136 million was identified as a cost for the creation of Nunavut. I believe the general public were aware of the $150 million that had been previously granted to Nunavut for training and infrastructure. Could the Minister shed some light on criticism that the government has received that nobody knows what the costs are. I believe there was information presented by this government very early on that give a much larger figure. So I would ask the Minister to comment on the amounts of money that have come in the past, have been asked for and additional funds that will be needed. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Could the Minister comment on the amounts of money that have been allocated to Nunavut, the $150,000 previously, the $136 million that had been asked for and also the additional funds that have not been totally calculated for western processes for division? Thank you.

I think Mr. Henry may be alluding to early on some of the previous studies that were done by some of the renowned Canadian auditing firms. I believe there was two done at the time where this government did one, previous government I believe, and I think the federal government did say this is what we think the cost of division is going to be. These numbers I believe, if my memory serves me correct, were somewhere around anywhere from $350 to $500 million. There is no question that those two reports were out there. But these reports were done at a time when it was not clear as to exactly what the new Nunavut government was going to look like. The NIC report which came forward gave a very detailed description of how the new Nunavut government should unfold. That then provided us and others like the Interim Commissioner to cost that government, and that is what we strove to do because I remember a year ago I said the next step after the Footprints in the Snow 2 documents came out was for us to cost that exercise with our partners.

In our costing we have determined that on a transitional basis, one time costs in an ideal world, it would be an additional $136 million. But what I did say, in my opening comments and have said since then, is we should focus on the action plan. The reason that I say focus on the action plan and to reach a consensus on it because once consensus is reached on what we think we can realistically accomplish that will determine what the costs are. The $136 million, I said publicly last week, was not a request for that money from the federal government. It was to demonstrate to the federal government in an ideal world what the shortfall was. So, you need to bring the players to the table, the Interim Commissioner, western coalition, ourselves and the federal government to reach consensus on a course and an action plan that we think we can realistically accomplish in the next 18/20 months. Then cost that. I do not know what that is going to be yet because we still have not had the meeting, and we still have not reached consensus.

The difference between what was done before and what is done now - I just want to say it again. Again, I am trying to keep my answers short was because at the time it was done by Peat Marwick, or some of those national firms, there really was not the accurate detailed information that we now have. I am fairly comfortable that the numbers that we now have on the table - we are going to put on the table down the road as it relates to two new formulas are easily substantiated because of the backup and because of the detail that we now have. I do not know whether that answers my honourable colleague's question, but I hope it does.