Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Further in this area, as we go through this item and being the Financial Management Board Secretariat, you are requesting $6,784,000. That is the item level as you described it, but if we flip the page to directed program details, activity level, staff housing. Am I correct in that?

As Members in this House, we are given that detail to know what areas you are spending your budget on. That is the way we are voting those dollars, that is my understanding of the process. Thank you.

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, what is being voted is the item, the whole department. When we break it into activity, we are breaking it into areas within our mandate and what the figures we have in there are, at this point our estimates, of the requirements within each of those sections within a department. We do not have separate votes for each activity. The vote is at the item level and then also at the appropriation level.

We have to have some flexibility as Ministers because we may not be spending all our money. Again, I will use the Department of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development as an example. We may not spend it all in environment protection, but we need more in forest management or vice versa. We need the flexibility in managing the departments responsibly, to be able to make those kinds of movements. We have a responsibility, as well, to report anything over $250,000. Thank you.

General comments? Detail. Page 2-37, directorate, operations expense, total operations expense, $6,748,000. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now as we are voting this amount in, you are talking the item level. Is that correct?

Mr. Roland, could you restate your question?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just for clarity, as we go through an example here. The total operations expense, $6,748,000, is the item level?

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman. No, that is the activity level. What we have here is an activity summary of $6,748,000. The item level is the whole department. As I said before, we do not vote each of these activity levels. We agree with that as being the reasonable and good estimate of what is required over the year within that area. That is what we have been doing with all departments. The vote is at the item level.

Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. What is the purpose of us going through each activity level and agreeing to it as we go around the table?

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman. What we are doing is agreeing that this is a reasonable estimate. Again, we use the word main estimates for that purpose. This is an estimate of what we need, it is not the final, fixed amount that has to be spent within that activity. It is an estimate. As you know, we are not voting each of these. In fact, as we go through them we are just agreeing that and the vote comes at the end. We are not voting at this level.

Mr. Chairman, we have the flexibility to be able to manage our departments that way, otherwise, we are going to have lapses in areas, we are going to have surpluses in some areas, and I think it would severely hamper Ministers or deputy ministers' ability to manage their departments if we suddenly started to vote each activity separately.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For me as I look at this, we do not see any different steps taken for one. We go through this process and as we go to the other page, we do not see any other process and then when we go to the very first page for the department, we still get a call for agree. There is no formal counting of votes for and against.

We have been going through this process all the way through. If you are going to make a distinction there, then it should be a very clear distinction. As we go through this and as we spent two weeks in committees going through the detail of departments, departments justifying their expense in a whole lot of detail. Now you are saying, in fact, that it is just an estimate and that does not really count for anything, it is just a grand total. No wonder there is concern being raised in this forum or through some Members on the duplication from standing committee to committee of the whole. As we are, we see a lot of duplication. It would be, if that is all the purpose is to say at the end of the day, all your voting is the grand total. The rest of the information, the work, the hours spent by staff, really does not count for beans. This is where we get into situations. As a Member of the 13th Assembly, it was the same thing, when it came for capital and why most, of the changes for reporting of capital came through. Thank you.

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, when we vote the whole total appropriation bill, then that gives us an amount for each department. That is what is voted on, the amount for each department. We cannot move money without the authority of the Legislative Assembly. There is an amount for each department. What we have here in our activities are the estimates of what we need in each of the activities. We are not voting on it at this level. We do have a responsibility, as well Mr. Chairman, to report anything over $250,000.

When it comes to capital, when they are new projects, again we have to consult with the MLA or the standing committee. It may have been useful, particularly for new Members to have gone through the Financial Administration Act first to realize what the responsibilities and authorities are within the Financial Administration Act. Maybe some day we should take the time to go through it carefully. If we want to change the process here we would have to change the Financial Administration Act as it is now. I am not sure when it was last changed, but to do it differently would mean changing that act. This is the same process that you would find other jurisdictions across Canada following.

To try and vote by activity and limit any ability back and forth, I think, would seriously hamper a department's ability to be managed by Ministers and deputies. Thank you.

Mr. Roland.

So in this case here, for example, you are requesting under directorate, total operations expense, $6,748,000. In fact, what we are saying is that we just agree with your estimates. It does not count for beans in that sense, with all the work that has been done in providing detail as to compensation and benefits, for example, $2,687,000, and telling us the amount of positions that you have, where those positions are, how many people are affirmative action. What was the reason for all of that work in that sense? More importantly, can you with what you have laid out here, put money into an area under something that was not discussed under the detail level? Can you create a new program, a new area, and put money into it without notifying anyone if it is over $250,000? Thank you.

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, we have committed to discussing new programs with the standing committee and that is a pattern that we want to follow right across all of the departments. We have made that commitment, but to answer your question, technically if a need came up during the year for an expenditure in another activity or within this activity on something that we have not even discussed here, we could make that kind of adjustment. If it is over $250,000 we have to report it back here, though. What we cannot do is to move money between departments. We could not move money from Health and Social Services to Resources Wildlife and Economic Development or something. Thank you.

General comments. Detail. Directorate, operations expense, total operations expense, $6,748,000.

Agreed. Grant and contributions, directorate, contributions, total contributions, $1,238,000. Mr. Roland.