Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak today and not have to rush to the clock. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to provide what will be my last comments in this House with respect to the unsigned note I received. To understand the significance of the note and its timing, it is important for me to provide some background.

On January 27th, I made a Member's statement in which I stated, in case you think I embark on this mission of accountability and transparency lightly, I assure you I have considered the consequences. In spite of warnings and admonitions with the accompanying details of what might happen to me if I do not adhere to this advice, I will continue to ask questions, in public, in the hopes of upholding the confidence of my constituents and the public in this government.

As further background, Mr. Speaker, to what I meant when I said warnings and admonitions, I will refer specifically to a few instances. I have already spoken in the House of being called to the Premier's office on November 24th. The two areas the Premier questioned me about were the issue of the ownership of the Lahm Ridge Tower and the issue of the arrangements surrounding the lease on the house that he leases from Mr. Mrdjenovich. The Premier stated that he would take appropriate action if I slandered him in checking into these items which I informed him I had been publicly confronted regarding during my most recent constituency meeting in Hay River. It was not a secret that I had made a public commitment at that time to check into these matters, and I do believe I have done so without slandering the Premier.

I had learned of the Lahm Ridge Tower lease and purchase at my home in Hay River from an article in the News North. After reading the article, I spoke with the deputy clerk, Mr. Schauerte. I asked if research could find out for me if the lease extension was signed before or after the property was sold. Before I got an answer to that question, the next day I received a call at my home again in reference to my research request. I was told that people were not pleased with my questions. At that point, I called Mr. Schauerte again, and I asked why my research request had not been kept confidential. I understood that the researcher would have contacted Public Works and Services to get the answer to the question, but others had now decided to get involved. Usually research materials are kept confidential, and Mr. Schauerte did confirm to me that it had been kept confidential, that if it had come from any place, perhaps, the Member who called was on a fishing expedition.

Other comments that were made as I proceeded to find answers included things like, being said to me, you are going to get hurt and you are going to get your head cut off. I have been approached by some people warning me that I should back off.

So although determined to find the answers to several outstanding questions, I hope now, Mr. Speaker, everyone can understand why I was not particularly amused when I received that unsigned note. Reprisals seemed to be on a lot of people's minds.

I was in the middle of a set of questions when I received the note. I promptly stopped and pondered what I should do about the note. I quickly fired off a note to my colleague, Mr. Picco, asking if he knew who had sent the unsigned note. I watched while he consulted some of his colleagues around him. It was then that I decided to table the note. Mr. Speaker, I was shocked by the note. When I tabled it, I noted that on one side it said Jane Groenewegen and I commented that my name was spelled correctly. I seldom receive notes in the House with my full name on them, most often it just says Jane G. on the outside. I was shortly, after that, advised by someone who I have respect for, that in their opinion, they recognized the handwriting and that Mr. Arlooktoo had written the note. I tell these things, so that people can understand how I began to arrive at the opinion that I formed.

The next day, the note was ruled as inadmissible by the Speaker because it was unsigned. Also, the next day I received a signed note from Mr. Arlooktoo. I compared the hand writing and though not a professional, I noted the similarities. I retrieved the tabled unsigned note and put it together with the note signed by Mr. Arlooktoo. During the next few days, Mr. Picco told me, more than once, that he thought Mr. Barnabas had written the note. I asked Mr. Barnabas once privately and was completely convinced when he denied it. Mr. Picco persisted in saying it was Mr. Barnabas, so I got the two of them together in Mr. Picco's office and I said, Ed, you tell Levi what you are telling people about this note. So Mr. Picco did, he said to Mr. Barnabas, I think you wrote the note. At that point, Mr. Speaker, I begged Mr. Barnabas, I said, please Levi, if you wrote the note, just tell me, this will be the end of it. You are my friend and it would mean nothing coming from you, referring to the note. He said he did not write the note and he left Mr. Picco's office visibly upset. I, again, completely trusted Mr. Barnabas' denial.

I held onto the notes for several days until I had a chance to speak with a friend who would have knowledge of forensic examiners. I received the name of a highly recommended examiner in British Columbia and forwarded copies of the notes and some other handwriting samples for reference to him. He indicated in his report that he believed the author of the anonymous note and the note signed, and I quote, "Goo" to have been written by the same individual. In the meantime, I had also received a call from a close former working colleague of Mr. Arlooktoo indicating that they had recognized his handwriting from the original tabled document published in the newspaper as well. By this time, Mr. Speaker, I was becoming very convinced that Mr. Arlooktoo had penned the note. The Premier denied that it was any Member of his Cabinet, and then I tabled the forensic examiner's report. Mr. Arlooktoo later stood on a Point of Privilege, the offence being that by tabling the report, I had implied that he was lying.

The next morning was a Caucus meeting. I did not come in until around 10:00 a.m. Unbeknownst to me, the issue of the forensic report was on the Caucus agenda. Mr. Todd, as House Leader, came to my office and advised me of the meeting. He said, I should have been there, but since I was not, he was sent, as House Leader, to speak to me and this is what he said. He asked if I would stand up in the House today and apologize to Mr. Arlooktoo for tabling the report. I said no. He asked if I was aware that there could be a motion brought forward, a motion of censure to have me expelled from the Legislature for a period of time. My response was go for it. His third question was, Jane, if someone comes to you and tells you that they wrote the note and stands up in the House today, confesses and apologizes publicly, will you apologize to Mr. Arlooktoo? I said, and please listen very carefully because this is important, I said, Yes, I will, but only if I believe them. Mr. Todd returned to my office after a few minutes and told me that I should expect a visit from Mr. Barnabas. Noon came and passed. Around 1:00 p.m., Mr. Barnabas came to my office. He apologized. He said he wrote the note. I said, okay, write it for me again. I wrote the words on a piece of paper. In front of me he wrote the note. I said, thank you, Levi. I accept your apology. I believe you, and I will apologize to Mr. Arlooktoo. I did not make a secret of the fact that Mr. Barnabas had recreated the note for me. I then informed the House leader, and what followed in the House is on the public record.

Thinking that I had placed a tremendous amount of confidence in the report of the forensic examiner, I forwarded a second note, thinking he, like me, would be convinced that Mr. Barnabas had written the anonymous note. Apparently he was not convinced, but I told him that further handwriting samples would not be likely at this point in time. The media did ask me for copies of Mr. Barnabas' handwriting which I would not provide. I felt it was up to him if he wanted them to see his handwriting or if he wanted to talk to them. They wanted to send it out for their own report, but the only samples of handwriting I have ever made public was by way of the two tablings in the House, the first anonymous note and then, the forensic report.

In summary, do I believe that Mr. Levi Barnabas wrote the anonymous note? For the record, Mr. Speaker, yes, I do. Do I think that he knew or would have cared if I had an $800,000 loan with this government? No, I do not.

I am not impressed with the implication in the House yesterday that I was under some kind of obligation to provide Mr. Barnabas' hand writing to the media and that his denial to provide it to the media or speak to the media should, in any way, be construed as a refusal to give me a handwriting sample. He tells how he provided an exact copy, and I quote, "I note that this fact was not mentioned in the article or by Mrs. Groenewegen." I also take exception to, and I quote, "Mrs. Groenewegen's comments, if indeed they are accurately reported, suggest that I was lying when I admitted that I was author of the note to Mrs. Groenewegen." Mr. Speaker, I do not like the suggestion that I am a liar. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know which part of the article suggested that I thought Mr. Barnabas was lying. I only wish that Mr. Barnabas had been so concerned about the whole truth when he repeatedly denied to me and others that he had written the original note.

For the record, Mr. Speaker, absolutely everything that shows up in the quotation marks in the media reports is either directly taken from Hansard or does represent what I have said. What I do not claim in some cases is the slant, the headlines or the preamble to some questions posed by radio or television interviewers. I have no control over how people frame the questions or assemble the quotes, but everything in the quotations is what I said.

I cannot understand, the Premier keeps interrupting me here. I do not know what he is mumbling about.

On the other hand, I am amazed. I am amazed by some of the comments made by Mr. Arlooktoo in recent media interviews for which I have transcripts. For the record, I have never said that I am obsessed with anything. I have never vowed to discredit the Premier because he might run in my riding. Mr. Speaker, I do not even know if I will run in my riding, let alone what someone else might do. If you want to talk about innuendo, rumour and misleading information on the record in media transcripts and Hansard, let us consider Mr. Arlooktoo's offensive remarks yesterday. He implied that I am dishonest and parasitic. In the media, he has represented that he could have had me kicked out or suspended by the Legislature. He has accused me of bringing up unimportant issues in this House. He has accused me of saying that he and the Premier put Levi up to writing the note. I did not bring this note issue up again, Mr. Speaker. I believe it was in response to media reports that it has come to the fore again. It seems that Mr. Arlooktoo has taken a lot of speculation and rumour regarding this note, perhaps from the public, perhaps from things he has heard said and attributed them to me in public forums.

Anyhow, I could rise on a point of privilege on all these matters, but I am not going to. The bottom line is that the House itself is the final judge of what is acceptable and frankly, Mr. Speaker, I do not have a tremendous amount of faith in that judgment at this point in time. This is my last word on the note in this forum. If it comes up in another forum, Mr. Speaker, it will be in the courts in a civil law suit for libel and slander. Mr. Speaker, I am not now, and never will be a sweep things under the carpet kind of person. However, I can definitely be a forgive and move on kind of person. I am asking all Members of this House to consider my perspective on this, what they might learn from this, how they would have felt having received this note, given the circumstances, perhaps how they could have acted differently, given those who now say that they knew all along and did not consider it important enough to take measures to help resolve it before it got to this point.

To the Members who have been supportive, I thank you. To the ones who joined the mob mentality of what feels like a bunch of school yard bullies, I think the public is pretty aware of who they are.

I do not sense much support in this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, but I will carry on with the overwhelming support of the public who approach me everywhere I go to thank me for what I am doing. Just this morning, as I rushed through the mall with my little girl, I had to stop. A young man said, hello, Jane as if he knew me. I stopped, I shook his hand, and I said, who are you? He replied, I am nobody, just a big fan of yours. Mr. Speaker, it is for my constituents, northerners, known or anonymous, I want to tell them that the note issue is over for me in this forum, but I assure you that I will continue to pursue actions which will bring back the confidence to this government.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

--Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Monday, March 2, 1998, I will move the following motion.

I move, seconded by the honourable Member from Kivallivik, that the Government of the Northwest Territories formulate, in consultation with all affected parties, a policy to affect the integration and inter-jurisdictional cooperation necessary to facilitate the development of comprehensive agreements between governments and land claims representatives, but not limiting them to the environment, wildlife management, economic development, trade and tourism and social and cultural development. Further, it is recommended that the comprehensive agreement board consider of all parties participating by establishment of co-ordination the negotiation and implementation of this agreement.

I call the committee to order. We have a number of items for consideration by the committee and I would like to ask Mr. Ootes for direction. Mr. Ootes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That we continue with Bill 8, Appropriation Act, 1998-99; Committee Report 2-13(5); Committee Report 3-13(5); Committee Report 4-13(5); Committee Report 5-13(5) and that we continue with the Department of Transportation. Following that, that we consider Bill 14, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Act and the Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act and then carry on with the Department of Renewable Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ootes. Does the committee agree?

Thank you. Could I ask the Minister if he would like to bring in any witnesses? Mr. Antoine.