Justice, operations expenditures, community justice and corrections, not previously authorized, $1,069,000. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a question here. My understanding was that there were estimates done on how much we would receive from Nunavut and it was in the area of $5 million per year over and above the existing dollars being spent on the system. As it is today, no changes have been made because there is a lack of dollars coming from Nunavut. Why is it they require a supplementary appropriation? There have been no new systems added to the correctional systems we have in place, when the plans were put in place. It was revenue over and above accounting for inmates that are not there now. Why would they be requiring this supplementary appropriation? Thank you.

The Minister responsible for Finance, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, prior to division, the GNWT and the Interim Commissioner's Office for Nunavut came to an agreement that Nunavut offenders who could not be housed in Nunavut would be transferred and kept in the Northwest Territories. Revenue projections were estimated using the average number of Nunavut offenders that had been held in previous years.

With that agreement in place, the department's vote 1 appropriation was reduced in anticipation that it would be replaced by vote 5 revenues generated by the agreement. The reason we need the money is, we took it away in anticipation of the revenue being realized by the continuation of Nunavut inmates using the Northwest Territories facilities. The money had been taken away, that is why we needed it back. Thank you.

Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When Nunavut was created, we lost a lot of revenue. Not revenue because it was a cost to the government to begin with. We know that facility, particularly this facility here in Yellowknife, was over the maximum for which it was designed. Anybody over the maximum would almost profit, and that is a hard word to use in this system, but that is the way I am seeing it right now.

You are stating that in fact there was money out of the system when Nunavut went on its own and they had to build that back in through the billing. Unfortunately, in a sense, we are not getting the number of inmates from Nunavut. Is that correct?

Minister Handley.

Yes, Mr. Chairman. We took the money out of vote 1 and we are expecting to generate revenue by the same number of Nunavut inmates continuing to use that facility, as had been prior to division, so we would get the money through a vote 5.

Nunavut, for their own reasons, have not been sending the same number of inmates and we have not had the revenue to continue to operate that facility. The costs of operating the facility are largely fixed costs, regardless of whether or not we have 70 or 50 more inmates, whatever it may be. The costs are there. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Justice, operations expense, community justice and corrections, not previously authorized, $1,069,000.

Total department, not previously authorized, $1,069,000.

Education, Culture and Employment, operations expense, advanced education and careers, not previously authorized, $325,000.

Total department, not previously authorized, $325,000.

Transportation, operations expense, expenditures, Arctic airports, not previously authorized, $379,190.

Community access roads, not previously authorized, $101,000. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This issue on community access roads had some discussion in committee. In light of the Minister's statement today on a winter road to Wekweti, and I go to the third paragraph:

"The Department of Transportation winter roads are built every year and kept open through the season for use by the general public. The Department of Public Works and Services resupply road to Wekweti is built strictly for the delivery of freight with no public commitment that it will remain passable for general traffic or kept open any longer than necessary for the delivery of shipments involved."

I believe the same process was used in years past for access into Colville, whether it was for fuel resupply and resupply for materials for buildings. So why is it being done in this way and, under community access roads, the limit is $50,000? This is double that. When other Members in the past have asked for more funding from that particular program, it has been denied. Can we have some information on that? Thank you.

Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, following our discussion on this last night, we have checked and the activity for this is not community access roads, but is the highways activity. I want to clarify that. There is an error in this document. This is a highways activity.

Mr. Chairman, with that, I would like to refer the question to the Minister responsible for Transportation.

The Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe the clarification as to the community access road program answers some of the questions the Member raised. However, in reference to why we have now included the road to Colville under a winter road program is for a number of reasons. The first is the activity in the oil and gas sector in that particular area is warranting a road into Colville Lake. Furthermore, the community itself has requested a road into Colville Lake on a yearly basis. Following that, there was some indication from the oil and gas sector that they would be prepared to share some of these costs. Based on these three things, the department received direction to put in a winter road on an annual basis into Colville Lake.