Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The debate has been, do we stick with 14 and four in Yellowknife or do we have some other arrangement, five or six seats in Yellowknife. Obviously, the debate has come down to that we are going to go, it would appear, with an amended motion. If it gets supported we are going to keep four in Yellowknife. Very clearly there are disparities, even within Yellowknife with one riding of 7,000 or so and one riding in the neighbourhood of 3,000. I acknowledge the fact that I should have, in hindsight, had that in the initial motion. I did not do that to offend the sensibilities of my colleagues who are voting against this particular issue. However, this is an attempt to involve the Yellowknife MLAs to try and bring a comparability within the constituencies in Yellowknife. That is the intent. To me, it is

very clear that we should be sticking with 14 and that means four in Yellowknife. Thank you.

Thank you. Regarding the amendment, I believe that the issue is about trying to address the disparity in the number of people being represented in all the constituencies in the Western Territories, not just the ones in Yellowknife. We can never afford to become selective in where we try to have our principles and values reflected. It cannot be contained within the boundaries of Yellowknife.

I think there is a danger that we are introducing a double standard here. The logic of this is that, yes, we are agreeing that there is a disparity, but we are not choosing, for instance, that the disparity be addressed in the least populated constituencies. We are saying, for whatever reason, that we want to impose it on Yellowknife against the wishes of the MLAs representing it. It makes a mockery of the amendment that says we will consult with them anyway. They are right here. They have spoken very clearly today. Who is not here, which is of greater concern to me at this time, is the First Nations leaders that live within the constituencies, particularly in Mr. Erasmus' riding. That is of a concern to me because they deserve more than just consultation after. Critical decisions have been made. We are making a very radical departure here. A very radical departure from the commitments we make particularly to first nations. I will not support the amendment or the motion. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have heard from a number of Members, and I, too, will be opposing the amendment and the motion. If there are to be no changes, then let us leave it as is. The people in Yellowknife know what constituency they are in right now. I do not see any reason to have this House force a change when, in fact, the change that was sought was greater voter parity. If that cannot be achieved, then let us leave the constituencies as they are. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I think that we run a significant risk if we look at Yellowknife in isolation. I do not believe that Yellowknife can be looked at in isolation if we apply the same argument to the rest of the western Arctic that we would be applying by passing this motion that the lines should be redrawn with no mind to anything other than numbers. I believe we open ourselves up to something which, on the surface, may look like a quick fix, but if that philosophy were carried over and applied in other jurisdictions in the NWT, I think probably the majority of Members here would be very unhappy with that. I do not believe that this motion diminishes the risk or the possibility of a court challenge anyway, so I will not be supporting this motion to arbitrarily redraw the Yellowknife lines in isolation of the rest of the picture in the western Arctic. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I, too, look at this as a very quick fix to the original problem and it is not going to serve to pass onto the public that we are giving this thing very serious thought. I think that Mr. Miltenberger and Mr. Roland should look at the fact that I have very small communities in my riding and I seem to be in a position here where I could suggest a motion that would change Mr.

Miltenberger's riding in a matter of a few minutes, with no consultation from his people. We should look at that very seriously. From a small riding, the city versus the town or versus the larger centres, to us is all the same. They are all bigger than we are, but just simply slicing up the pie without anybody's input, and serious input, I do not think that is very responsible government. I sure will not be supporting this motion because it has not been given enough thought.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Realizing the concern that was expressed by the Members for Yellowknife, I moved this amendment to try and involve them in any decision that would be made regarding the four constituencies within Yellowknife. I could understand where they are coming from for not supporting the motion, but by doing that, I guess, things are left open as they are or the original motion. I am hoping that by passing this amendment, it will allow more time as well to deal with the issue that is before us. I do not think that I am making a mockery of any system of government. That is not the purpose I have come here for and that is not why I put this amendment out.

There is also work, as we have all heard before, we are here to represent our constituents. A lot of them said, no more government. They have lived through all the cuts. This amendment gives time for the Members of Yellowknife, as well as the Western Caucus Members, to re-evaluate. Hopefully, it will go through. If not, I guess we deal with the original motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.