Merci, Monsieur Steen. Questions supplementaire, Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister responsible for the Department of Transportation, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Could the Member be more specific about what he is looking for?

Thank you, Minister Steen. Mr. Lafferty, perhaps you could be more specific. I will allow you this supplementary.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister responsible for the Department of Transportation, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I stated in my first response, the correspondence we have had with Indian Affairs on new roads related to our Highway Investment Strategy and as we tabled it, we also sent copies to the Minister. If that is what the Member is looking for, I would be happy to supply him with a copy of that letter.

Thank you, Minister Steen. Supplementary, Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister responsible for the Department of Transportation, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the only information that I have that relates to studies on roads in the North Slave were in relation to a document that was previously tabled I believe in this House and that was a document related to the highways strategy. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Steen. Final supplementary, Mr. Lafferty.

I am sorry, but I do not hear a question there, Mr. Lafferty. Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister responsible for the Department of Transportation, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that I have any documents with recommendations. The documents I was referring to was really the engineering aspect of the Slave Geological Province Road Proposal, for instance. There was engineering documents with that. There were no recommendations that I am aware of that came out of that particular document. However, that document is tabled.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. Item 6, oral questions. The honourable Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Premier, Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we have shared some information with the Members of this House about this issue. We can get very technical about it. I think this is where, as people who like to keep things as simple and as transparent as possible, we sometimes get ourselves into difficulty and hear the worst in what are very straightforward answers.

There is no about-face, unless you want to twist it into that. You are completely able to do that as Members.

The chief of staff position is not a newly created position because it came out of the executive assistant position, out of an existing position. Members, including the Member for Inuvik, will remember I was properly asked very strongly not to increase staff. Even additional secretaries were discouraged when we took office. I thought they would have applauded the fact that to politically enhance my office and the staff's ability to deal with their counterparts across this country, that retitling the executive assistant position to be called chief of staff and in order to track the people who can do that job, to give it a senior management level type of salary, to try to work it that way, that it would be resoundly applauded.

Here we are over a year later with this Member still much chagrining at this development. You know, you could have avoided all of this. They simply could have agreed to give me the additional staff position called the chief of staff and also allow me to keep an executive assistant position as well. That is hindsight.

The fact is we have put together a legislative proposal. We are dealing with it. The Minister responsible, Mr. Handley, has answered the questions. I do not consider that an about-face. It is explained in the legislative proposal and in some of the responses we have made to date. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Premier. Supplementary, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in fact, we can go back and look at the detail if we want, and there has been an increase in the executive, in the west wing, as some would call it.

Mr. Speaker, as far as I am concerned, we still have not addressed that he stated in Hansard that this was in fact an executive assistant position. In the response, the Minister responsible for Financial Management Board states that this pretty much does in fact fit in the same category as do deputy ministers. What is the change now? It has only been a couple of months since we broke off the last sitting. Why is there a change? Thank you.