Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Of course there is a theory, remember we had too many in the first place. I am not being facetious about it. The fact of the matter is, it is 6,000 plus employees for 67,000 people. That is disproportionate in my opinion, the amount of civil servants versus population, but in answer to my colleague, I want to assure him that with the delegation that we have done. I mean we have done enormous pushing out of delegation of authority. We have in fact made some moves. One that comes to mind would be the $5,000 local purchase authority that used to be $250 or a thousand dollars. In an effort to streamline and give some authority in delegation to people in the field. It is not something that you can just sort of say, well, we will do an audit and we will move forward to make it more efficient today. It is a general attitude, if you want, and I suppose to some extent, I am responsible for providing leadership and direction and I want to assure my colleague that there is nobody more cognizant of the need to make government more efficient, to make it less burdensome in terms of red tape and bureaucracy than I am and it is a continuing task that I am optimistic we will make it better than it was before, that is not to suggest that it is in an ideal situation. It is certainly our intent to make it easier, particularly of our senior management in the field, more responsible and give them more authority to go with it and I am optimistic with that will come more efficiencies and certainly more satisfaction in terms of staff morale, middle management, senior management confidence, et cetera. So that is sort of the intent, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Erasmus.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to hear the Minister's concern about affirmative action and other government hiring policies, because I am a bit concerned about some of the recent statements about hiring people, and the fact that the best person for the job was hired. I was not under the impression affirmative action policy indicated that the best person for the job was hired. In fact, it is when you do not have an affirmative action policy that the best person for the job is hired. From my understanding of affirmative action people who have status should be chosen before someone else as long as they are qualified to do the job. If my understanding of this policy is incorrect, could we get the Minister to indicate how affirmative action works and how it is implemented?

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I may take a moment and allow my colleague, Mr. Erasmus, a little indulgence. I would like to add one thing to the job strategy that was missed. That is, when we bring forward the job strategy, where there will be an integration of affirmative action program, I want to be sure everybody understands that the job strategy we are bringing forward will be tied to community and private sector partnerships and linkages that the government cannot continue to be the sole creator of jobs. So there will be a partnership there, either with the communities or with the provider sector so we can lever the dollars and get maximum benefit and get maximum impact to the people that need employment, whether it be seasonal or full time or sustainable as Mr. O'Brien has spoken about a number of occasions. I think on the affirmative action policy, and I am speaking for

myself, that there is a fine balance here. We have an important affirmative action policy which I support, but we also have a number of non-aboriginal, non-affirmative action people who have been in this country a long time. We have to balance it out. There is no doubt that no situation is perfect, and there may be isolated cases where some Members of the House and some members of the public field, a particular policy has not been put into place in a manner in which it should. In general, the affirmative action policy of the government is to do exactly as Mr. Erasmus says. That if some affirmative action individual person in the Northwest Territories qualifies for the job, that being in the affirmative action category, gives them priority hiring in relationship to the job.

Thank you. General comments, Mr. Erasmus?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Then, if there is an affirmative action candidate who qualifies for the job, from what the Minister is saying, they should get the job and we should not be hearing things like we hired the best person for the job. Is that correct?

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

What I said was, if there is an affirmative action candidate who has the qualifications for the job, has part of the criteria for selection for the job, they would be given priority hiring. If that in fact does not take place, that Mr. Voytilla advised there is an appeal mechanism in place, to allow that particular individual to appeal the appointment. I guess, in simple in language, if you have two candidates, both with equal qualifications, and one is an affirmative action candidate, they would take priority over the non-affirmative candidate, provided the qualifications, etc. were equal. I think that is the intent of the policy and I qualified it by saying I am sure like any policy in any environment there are always exceptions to the rule. It would be unfair of me to say there are no slippages through any policy whether it is this one or others, so it is not a perfect situation, but it is clear as to the criteria is set in the selection of employees. Thank you.

Thank you. We are reviewing Financial Management Board Secretariat 1997/98 main estimates. Mr. Erasmus.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Minister indicated if they have equal qualifications, is it absolute equal qualifications? Or does the affirmative action person have to meet the minimum qualifications?

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

I have asked Mr. Voytilla because I want to get this clear. My understanding is that the affirmative action candidate has to be qualified. Period.

Thank you. Mr. Erasmus.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So that does not mean they have to have equal qualifications? They do not have to have equal qualifications, they just have to be qualified for the job. Is that correct?

Thank you, Mr. Todd.

Mr. Erasmus is correct.

Thank you, Mr. Erasmus.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now, if the person is qualified, how much weight is put on the actual interview? The reason I am asking this, Mr. Chairman is because, many people know how to do good interviews, and people actually take courses. Weekend workshops and that kind of thing to do a good interview, but a lot of people do not and have not had that opportunity to do that. They may have a poor interview, but they may be qualified for the job and may do the job very well. What I would like to know, is how much weight is actually put on an interview if you know from looking at the person's qualifications that they are qualified to do the job?

Thank you, Mr. Erasmus. Mr. Minister.

Thank you. Of course I think it is important to point out affirmative action and non-affirmative action candidates can take courses on interviews. I think that is an important point item and I am told by Mr. Voytilla that the interview, although I can not qualify it, is an important part of the final selection of the candidate. There may be people who are do take courses in being interviewed, I do not honestly know. Certainly, if there are courses out there, I am sure they are available to all people. I think the interview process is important. I could not qualify it, say on a scale of one to ten, Mr. Chairman.

I want to assure my colleague, because I know this is an important issue with him, and it is understandably an important issue. I know he has spoken to the House on a number of occasions. It is the clear commitment of this government through the Premier and the Ministers where the changes we have made where we fundamentally believe that the overall political responsibility where affirmative action changes from the bureaucracy to the political management of the government will bring about a significant change to the way in which we have done affirmative action.

Each Minister will be held accountable in the House for his or her actions and their departments accordingly. I think it would be fair to say that our net result, on a historical basis nobody, whether an affirmative action client or not, is pleased with the result we have had. The system we have had in place was not as conducive to meeting the targets that are being set. Therefore the Premier, with the support of the Cabinet, changed the system. He has made the Ministers accountable, and at the end of the day I fundamentally believe that this will work better. That is not to suggest it is not without its shortcomings. All policies of the government, especially one of this nature, are going to have problems with it. I would hope that my humble colleague would give us the benefit of some time that a year from now he will hold us accountable. I call that challenge up, and I am optimistic and confident that the numbers will change because there is an overall political and moral obligation to do so. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Mr. Erasmus, Mr. Ootes, Mr. Krutko, and the time has run out. On my list, we have Mr. Ootes first, and then Mr. Krutko. Mr. Ootes. Mr.

Krutko, according to the list, you are going to have to wait until Mr. Ootes has been given a chance to speak. Mr. Ootes, you have the floor.

Thank you. In the area of general comments, Members are allowed to ask questions, so yes. Mr. Ootes.