Thank you, Mr. Barnabas. Members' statements. Item 4, returns to oral questions. Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a return to an oral question asked by Mr. Roland on February 5, with respect to continuous and non-continuous employees. During negotiations for the new collective agreement, information was shared with the UNW bargaining committee regarding the reductions in the wages and benefits required in order for the government to achieve its fiscal restraint targets. They were advised that the majority of savings required could be achieved through a reduction of gross compensation by 6.25 percent. The UNW bargaining committee proposed that the savings could be achieved through a combination of salary reductions and mandatory days of leave without pay. The problem with this proposal, from the government's perspective, was that the requirement for services provided by certain positions entails that the incumbents be replaced when they are absent from work. Accordingly, mandatory days of leave without pay for those positions does not result in any savings for the government.

The government's proposal on the matter provided the required savings would be achieved through a combination of salary reductions and mandatory days of leave without pay, where possible. Where mandatory days of leave without pay could not achieve the necessary savings, they were achieved through salary reductions only. This proposal formed part of the package that was subsequently forwarded and ratified by the UNW's membership. As a result, employees in positions that provide continuous service had their salaries reduced by 6.25 percent representing the overall targeted savings. Those who do not provide continuous service had their salaries reduced by 4.33 percent, with the remaining 1.92 percent achieved through the five mandatory days of leave without pay. Thank you.

Thank you. Returns to oral questions. Item 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery. Mr. Arlooktoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gives me pleasure to recognize Pat Thomas, the president of the NWT Teachers' Association and, on behalf of the Members here, I thank her for the nice buttons that she has provided.

-- Applause

Welcome to the Assembly. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Mr. Picco.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to welcome the speedskating team from Nunavut with representatives from both Pang and Iqaluit here. From Iqaluit we have Kevin Tikivik, Ootoo Maurice, Peter Jaloee, Benoit Savard, Nukasee Joamie and their coach, well-known, long-time educator in Nunavut and president of the Nunavut Teachers' Association, Mr. John Maurice.

-- Applause

Welcome to the Assembly. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Mr. Enuaraq.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Migitunik from Pangnirtung. She is on the speedskating team. Thank you.

-- Applause

Welcome to the Assembly. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Mr. Henry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Mike Kalnay. He works for FMBS and is in the gallery today. Mr. Speaker, as Mr. Roland just pointed out, he is a constituent of mine.

-- Applause

Welcome to the Assembly. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Item 6, oral questions. Mr. Roland.

The Minister of Finance, Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My honourable colleague spoke many times on the issue of fairness and defended his constituency eloquently. The approach we have taken in the budgetary process is one that not only implies fairness, but provides an opportunity for each and every Member of this House to say their piece in the development of the budgets through the committee structure. It is a unique budgetary process that does not exist anywhere else in Canada. It allows both the ordinary Members and the Cabinet Ministers to work in harmony with each other, to try to meet each and everybody's requirements under the fiscal umbrella we have. I am not sure how else to answer my honourable colleague. I know that he may be taking some inordinate heat right now from his constituency, but I would like to say that we have listened very carefully to what this colleague has said. We have recognized that his constituency is suffering on the economic side right now, not just from this government's budgetary program, but because of some of the developments taking place over the number of years. There is a great deal of empathy for my colleague and his riding. I believe the process we have in place is a unique one. We have tried to be fair to the best of our ability. I would hope that he and his constituency would see that when we finalize this difficult budget that is facing us today. Thank you.

Thank you. Oral questions. Supplementary, Mr. Roland.

Mr. Todd.

If we are talking about capital expenditures, we have gone from an average of a $180 - $200 million in capital expenditures on an annual basis. Frankly, as part of our deficit elimination strategy, we agreed that we would take some money out of the capital budget, as well as from a variety of other areas within government. The capital expenditures for this year are somewhere in the $130 - $140 million range. It is natural that there are going to be less buildings built. We have tried to assess what the priorities of the government are: hospitals, schools, et cetera, to find a way in which we could manage the non-essentials on the capital side. Everybody, Mr. O'Brien, myself, others, have all taken hits. We have heard Mr. O'Brien talk eloquently about the need for his health care facility in Arviat. That came out because we put the money in Mr. Ningark's riding. These were requirements. They were done because of certain criteria. Priorities were established. It has not been the easiest task in the world, trying to determine where we put the money and where we do not. I hope that my colleague does not think that we have unfairly or unduly taken money out of his riding in isolation of monies out of other ridings. The reality is that we have less money to spend, less buildings get built and more people will be unhappy. That is just the reality of fiscal restraint. I have accepted that reality, and I know my colleague has worked hard to assist us in accepting it also. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Todd. Oral questions. Supplementary, Mr. Roland.

Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You have to remember that I set the fiscal framework for this government based upon the advice and the support that I received from this House. We all agreed that we would balance the budget over a two-year period. In balancing the budget in the two-year period, I set targets for the Ministers within their portfolios. They had the responsibility and the authority to work with the committees to meet those targets. We are in what we call a reduction mode. That is how the process works. For example, I suspect my colleague is talking about Delta House because the budget is up today. Mr. Ng, who probably has one of the most difficult tasks before this House, was given certain targets. These targets were difficult to manage, but there was a clear recognition in the overall strategy that we need to ensure there was sufficient money to sustain the system. Then, Mr. Ng has to develop a budget along with committee, to meet the targets we have set so we can balance the budget and get on with making life better for northerners. Is it fair? I think it is fair. Is it difficult? Absolutely. Are people going to be unhappy? Yes, but hopefully we are going to see some light at the end of the tunnel. Now that we have managed to control our spending we can move quickly to do some other things. My colleague knows that we are working extremely hard to meet the requirement for new health facilities in his area, which will be a huge economic stimulus, assuming we can put the right fiscal framework in place, get the correct political support, and move on with it. While there are some negatives, there are also some positives. This constituency should recognize that he has represented that issue very well, and we are moving quickly to reach some resolve, so we can demonstrate to his constituency that we are moving forward in a positive vein to put new infrastructure into Inuvik, not take away from existing.

Thank you. Oral questions. Mr. O'Brien.