Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have always indicated that I support the creation of Nunavut, as this Legislature as a whole, but of course, that support is conditional on the fact that the level of programs and services for the people in the west should not go down. We have now heard that where, in an ideal world, there is $136 million short to implement Nunavut. I would like to know at what stage we are at now in the negotiations to acquire the remaining money to properly implement Nunavut.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you know, there is a coalition committee of northern interests that are working with us, NTI, Interim Commissioner's office, western coalition and the Government of the Northwest Territories. We are trying to put forward a common position on the fiscal issues as it relates to transition or to incremental or relates to the two gross expenditure basis. This committee has been working extremely hard for weeks now. I think we are close to, right now, understanding what we think the dollars are we require. My department, Mr. Voytilla and company, and all the staff that I work with, have been working long, long hours trying to do some historical tracking of how this government has spent its money. I think we are real close on that one as well. I think we are also close on trying to identify what we think the incremental costs are as it relates to the models that have been put forward by NIC and of course the current status quo in the west.

It is my hope we will be able to secure a financial arrangement for the two territories that would protect, as Mr. Erasmus says, the essential services et cetera, that northerners both west and east have come to expect by the 31st of March, 1998. That is certainly the target we have set for ourselves. That is something that would be my optimistic side. I think there is a desire on all the parties to do that. There is a critical meeting, as we know, by myself and Mr. Kakfwi with Mr. Martin and Ms. Stewart next Monday. The issue of finance as well as a number of other things will be on the table. I think it is moving forward in a fair way. There is still a strong commitment by the coalition, and I mean the northern coalition to stand as one and hopefully, to come to a consensus as to what the final number should be. My closing comment would be, I think we are real close to be able to say what the numbers are and to be able to defend and substantiate these numbers with the federal government. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand the costing and that type of thing is going on. I also remember hearing several times there is not that much more money that is going to be going into this process. I would like to know what will occur if we cannot get a commitment from the federal government to provide enough money to implement Nunavut properly. Presumably, the only way to do that would be to spend more of our money and if you spend more of our money, $100 million for instance, obviously the level of programs and services will decrease. Is there some point where we will say, that is it, that is enough, we are not spending any more money, and it is going to go ahead and will only go ahead on federal government dollars?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think I indicated in my address when I tabled the Creation of Two Territories documents a couple of weeks ago, on the transitional side. I think, you have to define the difference between on the transitional which is one time cost and most of that money is spent by the Interim Commissioner. In fact, all his money has to come from the federal government so there is a sense of security there. I said if you go back to what I said with respect to tabling the document, this government does not have the mandate or the money or the responsibility to expend any major transitional costs to move from one government to two. I want to make that clear. I think that is what Mr. Erasmus needs to hear. That is clear. On the incremental side and on the two new gross expenditure bases, that is where we are on discussion right now with the federal government and with our partners in the process, NTI, Interim Commissioner and the Western Coalition.

I am encouraged with the fact that everybody has been able to stay at the table and the fact that consensus, at least touch wood, to date has been able to be reached. Frankly, and last, there is an adequate level of incremental costs which was recognized in the Nunavut accord where it said, reasonable incremental costs will be applied, when we divide two territories. I believe federal government will ante up. Therefore, the concern Mr. Erasmus has got is will the level of service in the west deteriorate because of the division, I believe should not and will not occur. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am encouraged by the Minister's faith in the federal government. However, I have dealt with the federal government for many years and I usually do not take everything they say until I see them sign on the bottom line. I know we are trying to negotiate two new formula financing arrangements for the two new territories based on what the cost will be to operate and maintain those two administrations as well as, housing and the rest of that. Do we have a plan if we cannot get a commitment from the federal government for that formula financing arrangement, so

we can maintain the programs and services at the current level or at least close to the current level? Do we have a plan in place in case we cannot achieve that? Thank you.

I think you have to look at it as the federal government has made a commitment under a legal, political agreement signed called the Nunavut Accord. The federal government committed to reasonable incremental costs. Our task has been, and mine has been, is to identify what those incremental costs are going to be. To be comfortable enough in them that I could substantiate them to a man of Mr. Martin's stature, the Finance Minister. I want to be able to go into the meetings, at a political level, and say this is the amount of money we need, Mr. Martin, this is why we need it and here is the substantiation. I have got to assume, and I know there is always a danger of assuming, that our arguments are strong enough, that the federal commitment is strong enough that we will be able to move forward to reach the level of financing and the level of comfort we all need that will bring the incremental costs to the new formulas and ensure services continue at the level we have been used to. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In a different area, the Minister is also in charge of overseeing Affirmative Action. Since we have dismantled the Department of Personnel, there is no independent agency within the staffing process. We are supposed to be putting more emphasis on the managers, deputy ministers and Ministers of their own departments to ensure they increase the percentage of employees with Affirmative Action status in their departments. We have, this is quite some time now since the Department of Personnel was dismantled and we were supposed to increase these figures or percentages through this new process, I would like to know has the percentage of employees with Affirmative Action status actually increased since we have done this?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me, first of all say, the Premier has made it pretty darn clear to the Cabinet that they are responsible and each of the Ministers here are politically responsible to ensure there was an increase in Affirmative Action in our civil service. From my perspective, I see as that is where it fundamentally lies, and they will be held accountable in this House and to the public for their action or, heaven forbid, their in action. It has to trickle down from there. I do not have all the statistical information available at my fingertips today, but I am assured by most of my colleagues there has been an increase in Affirmative Action employees in most departments. I can get for my colleague, a detailed breakdown of that where it was before and where it is now. Suddenly, there is a political desire on the part of all Ministers to ensure that northerners and aboriginal northerners are given top priority in the job market when it comes to this government, its agencies, its boards, et cetera.

The other thing I am pleased to say that we did appreciate the hard work that was done by my honourable colleague and his two other colleagues in the subcommittee on Affirmative Action and I believe we have reported fundamentally, positively, to their report and in fact are enacting a number of the recommendations they made, as we speak. So I hope we are able to demonstrate to him, two responses to his committee report and through the fact we made it a political responsibility to increase the northern and aboriginal northerners into the government workforce and the third part, I can provide my colleague with the detailed information later on, I do not have it at my fingertips at this time, sorry. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that the Ministers have indicated the numbers of Affirmative Action status employees are at least holding their own if not increasing. However, when we make major changes, and we indicate that it is going to increase efficiency and to help us operate better, then the only way we can determine if this is actually happening, is to look at reports and look at numbers and the rest of that. The Minister has indicated that he could provide a detailed break down, so I would like to ask him when we can get such a detailed breakdown of each of the departments, so the Members can actually see for themselves that we have increased the efficiency of the Affirmative Action policies through this new method? Thank you.

Well, you know clearly, Affirmative Action and Northern Recruitment, the way I covered it, is a high priority for all of us. Not only is it morally the right thing to do, economically, the right thing to do. It is just good for the country. One example that my colleague who just left, Mr. Arlooktoo should be applauded, is he tells me he has an eight percent increase in his last year on Affirmative Action in the Housing Corporation. For example, if my memory serves me correctly, I believe the Premier indicated to me that he expected Ministers to table, on an annual basis, the results of their actions on Affirmative Action. However, what I will do, I will undertake to do an accumulative analysis of Affirmative Action, where we are now, and where we are a year from now and give that to my honourable colleague in this House, as quickly as I can. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to indicate that I appreciate the commitment, and I look forward to looking at the status report of where we are at with the Affirmative Action, increase, decrease, or whatever.

What I would like to know is, whether there is currently any independent person involved in the staffing process? For instance, in the screening and the interviewing, by an independent person, I mean a non-government employee.

Well, the short answer is no, Mr. Chairman. What we did do is change the way in which we recruit people, to put the onus and responsibility on individual Ministers, rather than just one that was responsible to the old Department of Personnel. The responsibility for recruitment lies with the departments. I believe it has now been fielded out to the regions. They understand what the policy of this government is as it relates to recruitment of northerners and

Affirmative Action employees. There is no independent, in most cases I do not think there is any independent third party at the table. No. Thank you.