Oral questions. Supplementary, Mr. Picco.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, what I am trying to find out here is where this money comes from. For example, the Standing Committee on Infrastructure said to put privatization of POL on hold, yet the government went out and spent $250,000 on the study and then they decided to shelve it. The government found $750,000 to do a Med-Emerg report that has been slammed by the medical association, which is $1 million. Who prioritizes this money? Someone must have extra money. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Todd.

No, that was money that was in the existing Ministers' budgets and they chose to spend it that way. Thank you.

Oral questions. Supplementary. Final supplementary, Mr. Picco.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Minister said earlier I was naive. I might be naive, but I am not stupid. There is money within the budget. The money is prioritized by the Minister. It has to come from somewhere. Is the Minister saying now that the Minister of an individual department has discretionary funds or money to allocate, even though the priority of this government, as an example, when we said not to study the privatization of POL as a recommendation of a standing committee of this House, they went ahead and did it anyway? Why can he not do the same thing in contradiction of what the Minister has just said. How is that money prioritized within the departmental budgets? Thank you.

Mr. Todd.

Mr. Speaker, I would never suggest that my honourable colleague was stupid. Ministers have authority within their existing budgets to move monies around, which is just the way governments are run. I cannot remember what the total value of the ability of a Minister is, I could find that out. They have the capacity to move monies around. The question that Mr. Picco is asking is, he is talking about surpluses. I am saying that is an unusual phenomena. The one that he alluded to is one that came about because there were significant savings in firefighting last summer, that is all. That was an unusual situation, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Oral questions. Mr. Henry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for someone on Cabinet who can answer a comment. Twice, Mr. Speaker, I have tried to ask this question today and the Minister, I should be directing the question to, is not available. I will hold my question until the appropriate Minister is available. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

--Laughter

Oral questions. Mr. Ootes.

Oral questions. Mr. Picco.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance earlier said it was unique circumstances where there was $983,000 in surplus money from the fire suppression program and that is why it was reallocated. Mr. Speaker, I understand that last week, there was a $1.2 million appropriation that was moved to the NWT Development Corporation. Where did that money come from? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Finance, Mr. Todd.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I was talking about the

unique situation where we did not expend the kind of money that we anticipated, in fire, that is fact, not fiction. The additional dollars that come about where we allocate money are done through a supplementary appropriation that my honourable colleague knows, that is where it goes, and he has the ability to be involved in that through committee. If he is talking about the $1.2 million that relates to the Development Corporation, I would have to take a look at that, but I would suspect it came out of supplementary appropriations. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My understanding was that it was not a supplementary appropriation, but was because of a surplus from another department. My point is, how could that be moved then, from one department to another when we have already demonstrated the need for more money, for example, in education and some of the other areas? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Todd.

I had better go back and check Hansard, Mr. Speaker. What my honourable colleague has been saying for the last two years, because all he does is keep asking us to spend money and then privately tells us to save it. Mr. Speaker, what I will do, is take the question as notice, so that I can get a clear response to my honourable colleague and report back to him. Thank you.

Thank you. The question is taken as notice. Oral questions. Mr. Picco. Your point of order.

Point of Order

Mr. Speaker, the Minister is implying in private conversations with me that I have said one thing and I have done another and that refrain is misleading the House because he knows that it is not true. I would like something done here on this.

Thank you. With regard to Mr. Picco's point of order, the Chair cannot make a decision on two opposing opinions. It is not up to me to make that determination. I would also remind the Members that other Members could raise on a point of order if, for example, a Member accuses another Member of misleading the House. The Member cannot accuse another Member of doing that and it could be raised as a point of order. Mr. Picco, you are the one who made that allegation. Mr. Todd can raise on a point of order and he will have a point of order. Mr. Picco, you do not have a point of order. Oral questions. Mr. Ootes.