Thank you. I can see that we are running out of time, Madam Chair. I just want to make a couple of questions to the Minister on tightening up what is deemed northern, what is eligible under the BIP? I do have some strong concerns when we allow multinationals and extraterritorial companies to be included under the BIPs. My question would be to the Minister. I know this has come up. Are we looking at it as a government to somehow limit these multinationals and extraterritorial companies as inclusive under the Business Incentive Program?

Thank you, Madam Chair. My question would be then to the Minister. When we say we are going to look at it under review, what is the basis that you are going to look at these companies? Are you going to say, for example, that they have revenue over $5 million, and they would not be on there? Are you going to look at where the head office is located? Are you going to find out whether they are paying income or corporate tax? I mean when we say we are going to look at it, to tighten it up, what are the parameters that you are going to look at to ensure that these multinationals and these extra-territorial companies have been deemed not grandfathered under the BIP? Thank you, Madam Chair.

The problem I see with that is, let us say we use a bank. The bank hires its staff from the local community. The local staff live in the local community, they buy in the local community. So looking at those kind of broad strokes, strokes the Minister is talking about, a bank, for example that is now grandfathered, could still be considered in place under the grandfather clause. So I am saying, we need some stronger, tighter parameters to look at. So, for example, could we look at that if it is an extra-territorial, (we learned something new, Madam Chair), so an extra-territorial company or multinational, you could look at, for example, if the head office is located in a certain location and the majority of the shareholders are in the south, for example. Maybe any company that is working in the north that is based south of 60 should be outside, or whatever, that there should be something included in it. I noticed by the clock Madam Chair that we are running out of time. I think I will move at this time a motion that we extend sitting until we conclude this matter and I would also ask, and bear with me, Madam Chair, that Mr. Kakfwi will come back with my answer to my earlier question on what type of strict parameters we can put in there to take care of the multinationals and the extra-territorial companies. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Moving off that and to give someone else a chance to bring up that area, I would like to ask a couple of questions on the standing orders and the manufacturing policy.

In my region we have some manufacturers, but they cannot compete east/west. For example, if the manufacturer in my community builds windows, to ship them to other communities he has to ship them from Iqaluit, for example, down to Montreal where they have to be re-crated, and then come back up on the sealift, to be shipped to other communities. Whereas, in the west, the windows could be shipped by, let us say from Hay River or Yellowknife or anyone on the road system, down to Edmonton and across the country, which I talked about earlier before.

There has been something put into place to address this area, where the standing orders or the manufacturing policy, are based territorial-wide. They should be based regionally. I am wondering if the Minister has looked at this? I know there is some note of it in the report, but my question to the Minister is, will we look more in-depth at the manufacturing policy and the standing orders to base them regionally, as opposed to territorial-wide?

Thank you. I realize that that was in the report because I did read it. My point was that the committee recommended it, but when we apply your checks and balances here on this policy, I want to make sure that the Minister is aware and that his departmental officials are aware that there will be great lobbying from different areas of the territories that have benefited from this policy. Whereas, you might have a small manufacturer, for example in my area, which may not have the same input.

I would say to you and say to this House that this standing policy, at the present time, is costing this government a lot of money. An example I can give you is with furniture, where in one of our government buildings, a table was broken and instead of having to go to the Bay and spend a $150 to buy the table, we had to purchase it from somewhere in the western Arctic. To get the table to Iqaluit, it had to be shipped down to Edmonton, flown across to Montreal, and then up. What is the cost for paying for this?

My question to the Minister would be, that when he is taking the recommendation forward, is to look at the cost. Can the Minister tell me if his officials or himself can give me a cost, at this time, of what that directive is costing this government, on a price comparison basis?

I think if we would address this area, we might be able to free up some of the millions of dollars that we are trying to cut now and to help Delta House or to help the senior citizens or whatever. I think it is a very legitimate point. Thank you, Madam Chair.