Mr. Speaker, I was fundamentally of the belief that northerners should solve northern problems. I just want to take you through some of the events that lead up to where we are today. On February 8, 1997, the UNW was given notice, in person, of the GNWT's intention to implement the Hay Plan Evaluation. On March 4, 1997, the president and others participated in a two-day training session in Hay River on the Hay Plan Evaluation. On August 8, 1997, a letter was sent to all employees and an opinion survey for the pay philosophy for the new plan evaluation system. On October 15, 1997, the UNW president was hand delivered the formal notice to commence collective bargaining and included advancing the rights of women in the NWT by finding a pay equity solution. We tabled our opening proposal on February 3, 1998, including a proposal for implementing a new job evaluation system and we communicated the process of the point rating system to the managers and employees on February 16, 1998. On March 8, 1998, the UNW signed an agreement to do a joint review of the job evaluation system and process used to satisfy itself that the points rating is bias-free. The UNW, on March 30th, did not show up for an agreed five-day meeting to review the system and process with the GNWT bargaining committee. They tabled a final agreement on May 8th. The point I am trying to make here, Mr. Speaker, is we have gone to inordinate efforts to work with our partners in the process, the UNW, to reach a resolution. They choose not to participate for a variety of reasons which are unknown to me. Northerners should be making northern decisions. There is a bargaining process that is in place that should accomplish this and at this time I fundamentally believe that is where it belongs. Thank you.

Oral questions. Supplementary, Mr. Ootes.

Mr. Todd.

Mr. Speaker, the position of this government is clear. We have to negotiate an agreement with the two parties. The GNWT has a responsibility and obligation to implement a pay equity and bias-free gender workplace, which we believe we are doing. We have offered to the union, in a joint union committee and government committee, to work through some of the minor issues we have with respect to this. I see no requirement at this stage of the game for a third party to be involved in evaluating this situation. This should be evaluated by the partners in the process, GNWT and the UNW. The answer is no.

Mr. Todd.

It is important to point out once again that I think it was Justice Muldoon and some others who indicated that the pay equity situation was a joint responsibility of the employer and the UNW because they negotiate agreements. I do not have, today, with me my legal opinion on whether or not we would be sued. I am advised that is an option that is available to the UNW. The UNW has as much responsibility as the government does for the pay equity situation that we are in today, in accordance with the decision rendered by Justice Muldoon on March 17, 1998. Thank you.

Oral questions. Final supplementary, Mr. Ootes.

Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe in my response to the first question, I thought I answered that but I will try it again on February 8, 1997, the UNW president was given notice in person of the GNWT's intention to implement the Hay Plan during the evaluation system at collective bargaining. That was on February 8, 1997. The UNW president and others participated in a two-day training session on the Hay Plan job evaluation system on March 4, 1997. A letter was sent to all employees on August 8, 1997. On October 15, 1997, the UNW president was hand delivered a formal notice to commence collective bargaining. The notice included an appeal to the UNW to advance the rights of women in the NWT by planning a pay equity solution that is financially responsible and fair. On February 3, 1998, the GNWT tabled its opening proposal at the collective bargaining, which included a proposal for implementing the new job evaluation system and second, the pay equity complaint. On March 8, 1998, the UNW signed an agreement to do a joint review of the job evaluation system and process to satisfy itself that the point readings are bias free. The UNW, on March 3rd, did not turn up to the meeting. Prior to that, there were no communications with the UNW that they were opposed to the Hay Plan job evaluation system. Thank you.

Oral questions. Mr. Krutko.

The Minister of Finance, Mr. Todd.

If my honourable colleague is asking, have we done a job by job evaluation into what the fiscal impact is in terms of the increase, we have done that. I believe we have provided that to all the Members of the House in the package that I sent to them earlier last week. If that is the question, yes, we have done that. Thank you.

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

Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate my colleague's clarification of the issue. I believe he is talking, to some extent, about the concern raised previously by Mr. Erasmus with respect to the benchmarks and the positions we took to evaluate that. We are in the process right now of talking to our staff and our management team who are talking to our individual employees who have some concerns with respect to the job evaluation system. Look, we know that 68 percent are going to get an increase in the job evaluation system. That means that 32 percent are not. So, that 32 percent are going to be concerned. There may be some concern with those who actually are going to see an improvement and increase in their position. We are trying to address the issues on a one to one basis with the employees, through our management team, in relationship to some of the changes that have been made and some of the concerns that have been raised. For example, in some of the communities on the janitorial side, I know there have been some concerns there. We have to address these. I said in earlier discussion, we did the 5,000 job positions. I am not saying today that it is a perfect world. What I am saying is there are going to be some glitches, and we are going to try to work these through. I want constructive, well laid-out debate on where the areas of contention are, and we will deal with it. We have asked the UNW to work with us and to give us the kind of detailed concerns they have with respect to the job evaluation process. I have said in writing, which I am prepared to table in this House, I have instructed my staff to work with the UNW to try to reach an appropriate compromise where we can. It is not going to be a perfect world, but the door is open. We are trying to work these problems that we have through. I would suggest to you again that it is understandable that some employees out there are not going to be happy with it given that some, in fact, although they see no cash reduction, there is a pay level reduction for about 32 percent of the employees and an increase of 68 percent. Thank you.

Oral questions. Mr. O'Brien.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to my new friend, the Minister responsible for FMBS and P3 Projects regarding the Arviat Health Centre. Mr. Speaker, as most of us know, this particular building has been bantered around and talked about for a number of years. At this point, it has been approved by Cabinet

and this House for construction. I would like to ask the Minister, what is the status as of today? When will the unit be started and completed? Thank you.

Chairman of the Financial Management Board, Mr. Todd.