Thank you, Mr. Steen, Mr. Todd.

I will certainly try, Mr. Chairman. I think maybe I can try by asking another question in a sense. I think what my honourable colleague is saying, if hypothetically, we had $200 million transferred from medical services x years ago, and was put into our pot, does that stay as health expenditures. I think that is where he is headed with the discussion. Over a series of years, the governments have negotiated formula finance arrangements with the federal government, and some of it has been transfer payments. For example, the last one was the Arctic A airports that the Department of Transportation transferred over. You know, that goes into a pot. Governments determine the pie. In another question by yourself, Mr. Chairman, I tried to indicate by percentage, where the money goes. This government has to make adjustments based on the conditions of the day, whether it is shifting money to the social envelope, taking money out of another envelope to move to the other envelope. So over the years, there has been a variety of specific transfers health, forestry, highways, airports, et cetera. The target is set money that comes in, and over the years the government, the previous and this Finance Minister along with his colleagues, makes the appropriate adjustments as to what

our collective needs are. At the end of the day, if you want in simple language, the formula financing to some extent is determined on a per capita basis, et cetera. The way it is right now. So, I do not know if that answers my colleague's question or not. I hope it does.

Thank you, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Todd.

I think I understand where my honourable colleague is coming from. I mean I only go back two governments. There was a number of negotiations that took place prior to me taking over the mandate certainly of this portfolio. I would consult with my two deputies tomorrow, Mr. Voytilla and Ms. Melhorn, to see if I could give my honourable colleague as much clarity as I can on some of the transfer payments that took place and how we, in fact, at the end of the day, used those monies. You will have to give me some time to look at that. I know where he is heading, I understand what he is saying and I will see what I can do. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Steen.

Thank you. I do not think we can relate to, refer to, or blame, the previous Finance Minister when he is not here to defend himself. Mr. Todd.

I have never blamed any previous management. All I have done is compliment them. Mr. Chairman, I think I should be clear to my honourable colleague. I think I know where he is going with this line of discussion. I need to be sure of what I can provide and what I cannot. Once I have done that and have some clarity on that, I will be able to report back to the House later on this week, and if it is required for public disclosure and we can do that, I would be only too happy to do that. I want to qualify today by saying I need to talk to my staff as to just how much work this is. This government has been around for a long time. Formulas have changed in terms of the way we negotiate them. Arrangements have been done, et cetera. I will see what I can do and report back to my honourable colleague through the House later on next week. Thank you.

Thank you. I have Mr. Steen.

Mr. Todd, would you like to respond? We have about four seconds.

My only response would be, I would hope we have concluded the general discussion on the budget, and I do not know how the rest of the Members feel, but at some point we need to move along. Do we not? Thank you.

Thank you. I have, on the list here, before I took the chair, Mr. Henry has his name on the list and Mr. Ootes. Mr. Henry.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I spoke earlier, and a number of Members spoke earlier today on the P3 initiative. I still support the initiative. Something I would like to point out, which has been mentioned and used as an example a number of times, a couple of hospitals would be ideal projects. Much as I think they probably would be ideal projects, I think there is one significant obstacle that has to be overcome before we get anywhere down the road to constructing facilities that we may not be able to employ personnel to operate. As much as the initiative is good, there are many questions that have to be answered, and that would be a large one, to me. We have all heard about the difficulties all the regions, including the capital city, have in attracting and keeping medical staff. I would not want to see facilities built where we could not get the personnel required to operate them efficiently. The overall issue, I would like to talk about is the question of budget secrecy. I note in the weekly bulletin provided by the Northwest Territories Construction Association, in the January edition, they have a project in for the PW Kaeser School renovations in Fort Smith. I do not mean to pick on that particular project. I want to use it to emphasize a point. We, as Ordinary Members and I guess, all Members of the Legislature have a convention of secrecy. This particular situation does not really hold an awful lot of water. From the perspective of it is already out for tender and a number of organizations and construction companies have been asked to go to a great deal of expense to put in prices, which involves an awful lot of work. Why are items such as this being advertised as projects that are going ahead, number one, before they are approved in this House? If I could have some response from Mr. Todd on that.

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

I do not have the details before me that my colleague is talking about. If my memory serves me correctly - my favourite start - I believe that we do provide to all the industries across the territories subject to legislative approval, some preliminary information on projects that are coming forward, but it is always qualified with subject to legislative approval, I believe. I can check with the Minister of Public Works to clarify that. It is not budget secrecy.

Thank you. I think Mr. Todd has indicated that the request for information we were talking about was specific information that requires detail. Mr. Henry.

Mr. Chairman, thank you. I guess the point has been missed here. The point is, Mr. Speaker, if even the Member for Thebacha, if he follows the convention that has been laid down here and is asked questions on that by his constituents, he cannot comment on it. He cannot say, it is in the budget, or I do not know anything about it. The point I am trying to make is, there is no ability for Ordinary Members, especially, to make any comment on stuff that is in the public domain. I understand what the Minister says about there is always a proviso that it is not approved in the budget, but I would suggest for any contractor to put a price together to put this cost together is significant, and I would suggest that contractors would be anticipating that the project would definitely go ahead, but still it has not been approved in this House. I realize with our short construction season the difficulty that contractors and the government run into, but there has to be some way of putting this information out into the public, getting the public more involved in the process and stop restricting Members from receiving input from their constituents. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you. Mr. Todd.

It is very difficult to answer the question in a concise way when I do not have the information before me, Mr. Chairman. I will consult with the Minister of Public Works and have him respond in the House later this week. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Henry.

Point made. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.