Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Rattray is prepared to answer that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just following on the same line as Mr. Nitah in regard to small communities and making sure that we have a fair, reasonable price in the communities, considering the high cost of living in the small communities. My concern is more in the area of privatization.

What I see in privatization is that people that are looking at POL for privatization are looking at the lucrative operations where they know they have the volumes. They will be able to sell the fuel and they will be able to get the price and make money at certain operations, such as the larger centres. But in the smaller communities, Tsiigehtchic, or Colville Lake, or Lutsel K'e, any communities that have these operations where you have to bring a lot of these fuel costs where it is going to cost an operator extra dollars to maintain that service in these small communities.

What we are discussing in committee is that there have been a few places where they have privatized. Recently in Tuktoyaktuk, and they are looking at other communities. We have to realize that once you start cutting different portions of the business where you take all the profitable business out of the picture and we are stuck with the ones that are losing money, the communities or the government are going to be stuck paying the cost to continue to maintain that service in those communities. Especially communities such as Colville Lake.

I would like to ask the Minister exactly what they are doing to insure there will not be a monopoly out there when this privatization takes place where we sell off all the profit and we are stuck holding the bag with the ones that are losing money.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the point the Member raises is a very valid point in that we, as a government, do not want to be left with only small communities to subsidize, because we will not have the economy at scale.

Before we accept any proposals, we, as a department, take it to the Financial Management Board Secretariat and Cabinet. We have to identify how this specific proposal we accepted is going to affect the rest of the service that we have a mandate to supply. So, all the points the Member raised are very valid. We will have to take those into consideration before we accept any privatization proposals. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I like the fact the Minister is saying they will take it under consideration. But the area that Mr. Rattray touched on briefly is that they are considering looking at the possibility of having the individual communities pick up the actual costs of these operations.

I for one do not support that. If you start looking at the smaller communities, where you look on our capital plans for the last couple of years, we have been putting a lot of infrastructure in communities who did not have fuel services in the past.

I will use Colville Lake again as an example. They have just come on stream in the last couple of years because of this government putting the power generators in that community. Now they have to supply the fuel to offset that, as well as supply the fuel for aviation.

I do not support that initiative. I believe the reason for the government getting involved in the area of petroleum products was to ensure there will be a stable price. Also that they will be subsidized where the cost is higher in some areas and lower in others. It would be a balancing act to ensure we are able to sustain that cost.

This government, especially in many of our communities, makes up a large portion of the client-service for that fuel, the Power Corporation, the Housing Corporation, the municipalities. This government pays the cost to use that fuel. I think you are damned if you do and you are damned if you do not.

I think that is something we have to keep in mind, especially when you mention that there may be increases in communities to offset that cost. If that happens, I would like to ensure we have a public hearing or a public process before that goes anywhere. Will the Minister consider looking at that?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the department will be taking the Member's comments under consideration. I would also like to comment on the fact that, as the Member pointed out, if the subsidy for fuel is only being applied within those communities that are on the department's service list, it is very limited compared to the Territory as a whole. The only people that are subsidized are the ones that are receiving and buying at those pumps.

Larger communities that are on the highway are not involved in the subsidy system, so they are not subsidizing the smaller communities. The smaller communities are all subsidizing each other. But the larger communities, who are not buying from the government pump, are, in fact, not involved at all. That is the idea the government is looking at.

If we are actually going to have a subsidy on fuel, then it should be directly recognized as that. But how that subsidy is applied would be up to the government to see that the funds are applied to the department where the subsidy is. For instance, if a subsidy is on one of the social envelope departments, the funding would go to the social envelope departments, rather than the way it is being done right now. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My other question is the whole question of timing as to when these price increases take effect. In the last increase, ten cents a litre, I believe came into effect on New Year's.

I think the next time we do it, we should allow the residents and communities to have a heads up so they can prepare for this. If we do it, I believe we should impose these increases in the summer months so the people can be ready for it. Not halfway through the winter, where the cost of fuel usage is high during December and January, especially in my area.

I have received a lot of complaints because of the timing of it and the way it came about. I think it should have been better planned out, where the communities had an opportunity of putting some money aside for six months, realizing their bills are going to increase and they are ready for it. You do not get caught New Year's Day with an increase having to fill up your fuel tanks, because that is the highest usage of diesel fuel, especially for homeowners.

If you can take that into account. Consider the next time you do that, maybe you could consider doing it in July or August so that people can be ready for the colder, winter months and can plan for an increase.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the department will do as the Member suggested. We will try and give the public as much notice as we possibly can the next time we raise the price of fuel. We will also take into consideration the Member's comments as to what time of the year it would be preferable to raise the price. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman I would like to receive a bit more information about the project that has been put forward under land and buildings, North Slave Region, Yellowknife, office renovations, various. The interim appropriation amount is $445,000 for design and tendering costs for ventilation, air-conditioning and elevator replacement before July 31st, 2000.

This particular issue has had much debate over the years. As a Member of the 13th Assembly, I know it was an item that was overlooked and looked over and under a number of times.

I think that on one hand, it was proposed that the government get out of owning buildings because they were seen as a cost side of maintenance and so on. Whereas if it were a private sector facility, all the costs would be included within the lease.

With that, can the Minister inform us if what I see here is actual work going ahead on this facility? Again, knowing there was a lot of discussion in previous Assemblies, going back to the 1999-2000 main estimates under assets, management, details of capital, there is no mention in that budget of any work being done on the Laing building or planning dollars.

By going through the interim appropriation, have we stepped around some of the work that would have gone on in the business planning cycle? I would just like further clarification, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister responsible for Public Works and Services, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Rattray is prepared to respond to that. Thank you.