I think it is important to point out that I did miss one small, minor detail, and that is the capital plan. It really has to be built around the fiscal resources we give to it which I determine as the Finance Minister based on the overall budget. That is an important issue. Capital plan has gone from we talked about it for some time now - $180 million to $200 million to $130 million. There is a great deal more pressure on the capital plan than there was in previous years because everybody wants everything, et cetera. Changes in the capital plan are done, as my colleague is suggesting, significant shifts in capital money within the capital plan? Maybe I can get some clarity on that and I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, if I may, that you would not penalize my colleague with respect to questions. If I could have a little more clarity on what he means exactly. If he means significant capital shifts or does he mean emergencies or burned down schools? What exactly does he mean?

One of the things we instituted, through the Premier's office in the capital planning process, was to give as much maximum flexibility at the community level as possible. If a community wants to go from a road to an arena, that is their choice. We have said, rightly or wrongly, that accountability and responsibility lies at the community level. This is one example. The changes could happen there because we have mandated and given the responsibility at the basic community and political level. That is one way it could change.

A school burns, it is obvious you have to build it again. You go out there and you try to get as much insurance money as you can, and of course, we have a million dollar deductible in this government, so that is all part of that factor. Fiscal resources change capital planning. If things go well or if things go bad there are a variety of factors, Mr. Chairman, that can effect the capital plan. The fundamental is, if you get input at the local level which includes the MLA, who establishes the priorities of the community and it comes into the system we hope, I cannot quantify unless my honourable colleague has some examples, that 95 to 99 percent of that stays there. Thank you.

If memory serves me correctly, and of course I could be wrong, but I believe that I have to advise if there are any shifts in capital to the standing committees. I believe we have a process, which is another transient process in place that if there is a shift, I have to advise the standing committees. I believe I also have to do that if memory serves me correctly. I would hope that if there are some shifts in the capital planning, that the Minister responsible for that advises the MLA and the community at large, what has happened. If the community decides to make some changes, I would hope they would involve the MLA. Thank you.

I think what we have been trying to examine as a government, is first of all we have recognized that over the last two years we have taken roughly about $100 million of the capital plan. That is a significant amount of dollars because we do not have the dollars and can no longer put to building public infrastructure that is desperately required for the schools, hospitals, that I am sure my colleague is leading up to, or roads. The fact of the matter is $100 million less is being spent on infrastructure. I have taken upon myself, with the support of the Cabinet and the Premier, to look at what other provincial jurisdictions are doing creatively to find ways and means to bring back the level of capital spending that we have been accustomed to over the last ten years.

You have to pay for that no matter how you do it. It has to be all within the fiscal framework of this government and meet the deficit elimination legislation this House passed, et cetera. One of the means that I have been advocating, and you have heard me speak about on a number of occasions, is, the public/private partnerships where we find a combination of both private money and public money to bring forward some of the projects that were on the plan before and no longer are. I am hopeful that, by the middle of November, we will be clear on what the policy should be. I obviously have to seek committee input to it and, of course, Cabinet approval. Once that is done then we would be analyzing what, if anything, we could do in relationship to this new policy and this new approach to some of the capital spending. Thank you.

I do not know the answer, but if I could give you my interpretation of what I think RFPs are, as I tried to when Mr. Henry or somebody questioned me earlier. I fundamentally believe that RFPs are the ways and means in which to find entrepreneurial input into creative solutions as to how we should solve some of our problems, whether it is building roads, building hospitals, et cetera. I do not think it is anything else. I know there is a concern out there by a small majority of the business community. It is a legitimate concern. We have to try and answer that. I think I said that earlier on today. We are going to try to do that. It will probably become more so when it comes to public/private partnerships. All we are trying to do is to try to maximize government dollars to get the infrastructure required into the constituencies we all represent. That is the objective. How we get there at this stage of the game, there could be a variety of ways. It does not necessarily always have to be by the public tender process. If we had left the darn public tender process in place over the last ten or 15 years, how many aboriginal organizations would be in the private sector now? I have sat back here for 30 years and watched a minority group of non-aboriginal businesses take all the business and all the money. You have to find creative ways. You have to make political decisions to find a balance within the economic constituency. RFP may be one way. Negotiated contracts is another way. Public tenders are another. Thank you.