Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I as well would like to make mention of the passing of Mrs. Agnes Semmler, and would like to thank you for your words of acknowledgement of her work in the Northwest Territories and for the Inuvialuit people and aboriginal people. She served as a positive example and role model to many residents of the Northwest Territories. Many of the leaders we have today in the region have been impacted by some of her work and followed some of her examples.

Mr. Speaker, she had a way of putting words to people that were straightforward and to the point, but she also had tact and diplomacy where she could say these things in a strong way but do it in a respectful way -- something we can all learn from in our role in government.

Mr. Speaker, her involvement has taken place and shown that commitment by an individual can have profound impacts on the people of the Northwest Territories and people within the Inuvialuit group. I would like to just recognize those efforts. Though she has passed, there are many examples that will continue forward for the people of the Beaufort Delta and Mackenzie Delta of the positive example that she put forward and that many of us will hopefully follow -- follow and portray her dedication to the people and also speaking up to the issues. I would like to let the family know that they are in our prayers. Thank you.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I too have grave concerns regarding the removal of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation board by this government. The thing that frustrates me the most is the timing of this reaction by government, where a process was taken to allow for community input, to allow communities to have a say on what they think of the power rates in the Northwest Territories.

This is the first opportunity where small communities have really had a chance to voice their opinion on what is a fair process from small communities to large communities, communities on diesel generators and communities on hydro power. Mr. Speaker, the only way we could have found that result was to ensure public input. The only process that is available to the people of the Northwest Territories is through a Public Utility Board.

The application was put forth under the people whom I represent, especially the Mackenzie Delta, and the municipalities who want to have a say in regard to how power rates are set and have input into a process to determine what those rates will be.

Mr. Speaker, there is a list of interveners, some 60 people who put their names forth to intervene on this process. For me, that shows the public is interested in a one-rate zone process, regardless of if it is for or against. Allow for due process. The interference by this government to pull from under the people of the Northwest Territories and to can a board who did not have the same opinion of Cabinet and the Premier is unjust, unfair and undemocratic.

We are not in a communist state that determines who rules and who goes. We are in a position by this precedent that we have put in place which is a bad one for our boards, agencies and institutions of government, especially when it comes to a process that allows for public input.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will be having questions for the Premier on this matter later. Thank you.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it is nice to be back in the House with yourself and the rest of my colleagues. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to raise an issue that this government is proposing; revisions to the Business Incentive Policy.

Mr. Speaker, back in 1992, the Business Incentive Policy was instituted by visionary politicians who wanted to give northern businesses an edge in obtaining contracts, and thus ultimately fostering home-grown businesses, capacity and expertise. There have been many examples of the BIP's success, evidenced by the number of northern businesses that have flourished and are operating throughout the Northwest Territories today.

There have also been many issues that have been raised over the years that have identified shortcomings within the BIP, as well as many suggestions made to show how the BIP could be improved. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, in many cases with regard to the BIP, what appears to be an advantage to one company is seen as a disadvantage to another. Since the revisions of the BIP were announced in July of this year, I have been in contact with many businesses in the Hay River area who avail themselves of the BIP in many instances.

The feedback that I have received gives me cause to think that the proposed changes to the BIP have not been given due consideration and have not been adequately consulted with the businesses in the communities.

One of the drawbacks of the proposed changes is that, giving the GNWT has never been able to quantify the costs involved so as to determine the effectiveness of the BIP, what are the benefits to Northerners as a result of this policy? If we as a government cannot determine the costs of the policy and change the policy just for the sake of change, then this government is left with a policy that it still cannot defend.

Unfortunately, the proposed changes to this policy appear to have come about as a result of the actions of this government to waive the BIP on one specific project, and this has done nothing to instill people's confidence in this government. However, this does prove the point that the government had no idea what extra costs were involved as a result of using the BIP.

One of the things I have heard over and over again from business owners is that they feel the single biggest problem with the Business Incentive Policy is interpretation and enforcement of the policy. Too many businesses have created loopholes in this policy to benefit their own interests. One obvious example of this is the number of storefront businesses operating in the NWT.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I was very taken aback when one local business told me that he contacted the BIP office to raise his concerns on the proposed changes and was told that he could voice his concerns, but that the proposed changes had already gone to Cabinet and they were not really interested in looking at further change. This, after the Minister had informed us that the process was open for further input until September 30th.

I am very concerned that the changes being proposed do very little to address the fundamental shortcomings of this policy. I strongly encourage this government to take a step back and really take into consideration the concerns of the business community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also want to speak to the issue of the BIP revision process, Mr. Speaker. I certainly have many concerns about the proposed changes, but maybe none graver than the process that seems to have been undertaken here by this government. As my colleague Mr. Delorey has just indicated, we were let known that by September 30th, the government would be receiving input. One of Mr. Delorey's constituents called the RWED staff to offer some input. They were told that is fine, we will receive your input, but basically Cabinet has already done what it is going to do and made its decision.

Mr. Speaker, obviously that is not acceptable. If you look at the RWED website that speaks to the BIP revision, point number seven discusses why thresholds are being introduced, Mr. Speaker. It says that during consultations, the NWT business community -- business community, Mr. Speaker -- expressed the need for a dollar-value cap on the application of BIP bid adjustments. When we met in committee, Mr. Speaker, this did not seem to make too much sense to me, so I asked for minutes of the consultation process. I was looking for transcripts of the detailed minutes. I did not get them, but I did get a summary of those meetings, Mr. Speaker. In going through those, I can find a single reference to that. I can find someone saying there should be a cap on dollar value for the application of BIP. Do companies bidding on a $5 million contract really need to have the BIP application? Well, that is a valid question, Mr. Speaker, but in going through the web site, you get the indication that the NWT business community in aggregate expressed this need for a dollar-value cap.

Mr. Speaker, I think we can all see that this is an attempt by this government in imposing these thresholds to save money. Maybe it is a valid attempt and maybe it is something that warrants or merits a lot of consideration.

Mr. Speaker, it is concerning when we do not even know what the BIP is currently costing us. We know that the government is proposing goods contracts will max out at $25,000 per BIP consideration; service contracts at $100,000; construction contracts at $1 million. We are reassured by RWED that do not worry -- 95 percent of all of the contracts that we issue fall within those thresholds anyway, Mr. Speaker. I have no idea how RWED can come up with this and cannot come up with a concrete figure as to what the BIP costs us. If we really do have serious flaws in our contract administration policy, then you would think that there would be no way to know that 95 percent of our contracts meet this criteria. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So as I said, I am concerned that what seems to be an isolated comment has found its way into policy for the BIP revisions. We do not even know who attended these consultations. It was not clear from the minutes. I have heard from one of my colleagues that in their community, two members of the public were present and a raft of RWED staff. We do not know who expressed these comments. We do not know if a question was not posed, something to the effect of "Do you really think someone on a $5 million contract needs to be BIP'd?"

I think that we can see that it is not exactly clear what has gone on in this process, Mr. Speaker. You get the sense that government had already knew what it wanted to hear from this process, already understood the outcome it was looking for. It is almost like you are watching, Mr. Speaker, a movie and you see the FBI in a van outside someone's apartment with surveillance going, and when they have decided that they have heard that money is going to change hands, it is time to roll because we know we have something that is going to stand up in court.

Mr. Speaker, this is the impression that this kind of process leaves. In the words of my esteemed colleague from the North Slave, it gives the impression that the whole thing has been a sham, Mr. Speaker.

I hope the Minister will do something to address this and do something to assure us that we have a process here that makes sense and really values the input for Northerners and northern business. Thank you.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today I wanted to congratulate Ms. Jane Arychuk, the principal of the Deh Gah Elementary and Secondary School in Fort Providence, for receiving the Queen's Jubilee Award for Excellence in Teaching. In light of this event, I would like to share some of Ms. Arychuk's history and accomplishments with the Members of this House and the people of the North.

Ms. Jane Arychuk came to Elizabeth Ward School in Fort Providence as Miss Jane Neal, fresh out of teacher's college in 1980. After four years in the classroom, Jane became the principal in 1984. She has remained in the community as the principal since.

Under Jane's leadership, the school has changed to reflect the culture and the language of the community. In consultation with the community, the school was renamed Deh Gah School in 1992, which means school by the river. She married a resident of the community, Mr. Gordon Arychuk, in 1987, and has two children.

Mr. Speaker, Ms. Jane Arychuk was instrumental in many changes for the better that have happened and continue to happen at the Deh Gah school. Through much dedication, commitment and determination, Jane had a vision that was child-focused. Community support is excellent through parental involvement at the school. She, along with other dedicated staff members, have found alternate ways for some high school students, which has resulted in opportunities for the students in career planning and choices. Student and parental involvement is high, as the school fundraises a great deal for the students to explore other parts of the world outside of the Northwest Territories, including the provinces and the United States. One trip was to Florida to see the launching of the space shuttle Columbia. This mission, STS-90, had the Deh Gah School pin in orbit from April 17th to May 3rd and is now hanging in the school along with a picture of Canadian astronaut, Dr. David Williams.

Jane also initiated a proposal for the Aboriginal Head Start Program in Fort Providence and it is now considered a model program. The Deh Gah School is one of the few schools in Canada that has become FAE and FAS friendly.

Mr. Speaker, for many years, we did not have true academic graduates in our community. In 2000-2001, the Deh Gah School had four graduates and in 2001-2002, produced five more graduates with the required credentials. Three of the nine graduates are people who have jobs in the community, yet have taken certain classes to obtain credits for a high school diploma.

We are confident to say Ms. Arychuk has worked hard to make many positive changes in the Deh Gah School and she is certainly deserving of this prestigious award. I want to congratulate her and thank her. Mahsi cho.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some three years ago, this Assembly, when it was newly elected and just in office, told the residents of the Northwest Territories that we would be moving towards a better tomorrow. Our constituents tell me, Mr. Speaker, that while there is some evidence of prosperity, there are too many social issues negatively impacting on the quality of life of many citizens and they are not sure that it really is a better tomorrow.

What I hear most from constituents is health care, health care and health care. Mr. Speaker, I am not pleased with the structure of the Minister of Health and Social Services' review committee on the Stanton staffing issues. This committee was struck in mid-September. Like many others, I told him so, but to no avail. One Yellowknife resident quoting Albert Einstein I think put it most succinctly: "You cannot solve a problem with the same thinking that created it."

Mr. Speaker, residents from all across the North are concerned about the deterioration of the health care system and have suggestions worth considering. In my talks with constituents, I heard some of the following details:

- Mr. Speaker, waiting times for doctors at clinics are increasing in Yellowknife. You are now looking at four-and-a-half weeks;

- More people are using the Emergency ward when cheaper treatment options should be available such as clinics and public health centres;

- Health care practitioners are exhausted. Stress levels are high causing high turnover and wages, in particularly benefits, need to be increased. The lack of affordable housing is a major problem in Yellowknife; and

- Perhaps most significantly, Mr. Speaker, I heard that respect, humility and compassion are missing from our messages.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister may have heard this all before but I wanted him to know that my constituents are deeply concerned about health care. Like other residents, they are not prepared to wait much longer for substantive changes in the system.

In spite of these trying times, Mr. Speaker, the efforts of health care workers, doctors and allied professionals are applauded daily. We have exemplary health care people and experienced qualifications and dedication. I would like to acknowledge, Mr. Speaker, the effort, often beyond the call of duty, of our many professionals and front-line workers. We are fortunate to have their dedication and expertise. On behalf of my constituents, I want to acknowledge them for their contribution and thank them for a job well done. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to address the issue of the removal of the board of directors of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation. First off, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make it clear that I oppose the one-rate zone application. In fact, I had filed with the Public Utilities Board to intervene in opposition to the application.

So when the Premier advised me of the order that they were giving the Power Corporation to withdraw their application, I was torn. I was torn because, Mr. Speaker, I have always maintained that the Power Corporation should operate under a board of management with no political pressure. One of the main reasons for that, Mr. Speaker, is that I discovered when becoming the Minister responsible that political commitments had been made to communities, or at least communities felt that they had heard commitments from political leaders.

These commitments, had they been followed through, would have cost an awful lot of money and were not necessary to increase reliability of the power supply. Everyone would have paid more for power, even though it would not have improved the power supply.

Mr. Speaker, while the government moved to accomplish what I wanted by providing this direction to the Power Corporation, I am very disappointed that they did not follow through on the process. Once the application had been filed with the Public Utilities Board, the government should have filed an intervention with the Public Utilities Board and we should have then discussed the issue in front of the board.

Mr. Speaker, this situation actually illustrates an issue of communications, and really of bad communications, because to my way of thinking, we never should have gotten to this point. When I heard about the application I assumed that Cabinet had agreed to this process. This, after all, was a major policy shift; a social approach to determining power rates.

I had expected that there had been consultation with the Cabinet, particularly since the Minister responsible was at the meeting when I heard about the application. I guess I should have known then that there was a problem with communications when at the same meeting, a senior deputy minister said that Cabinet was not in support of the one-rate application.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe that the board members, most of whom I know well, would have gone ahead with this application if they had been told clearly that the Government of the Northwest Territories did not support the one-rate zone application.

I have no doubt that they feel that they have had the carpet suddenly pulled out from under them. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, honourable Members. Mr. Speaker, for the record, I would like to thank Gord Stewart, Ric Bolivar, Tom Zubko, Andrew Gaul and Eric Shelton for their work on the Power Corporation board. It is too bad that we have lost their experience and obvious dedication to this government's most significant asset. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon. Mr. Speaker, it is good to be back in session, where we do the most public part of our work. Over the next number of days and weeks, I am sure we will have hearty and lively debates about many important issues facing us today.

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to use my first Member's statement to celebrate something good that is happening in the city of Yellowknife, and that is the official launch of the United Way campaign.

Mr. Speaker, along with many other Members of this House, including yourself and the Premier, I was one of the many people who took part in the United Way Kick-off Pancake Breakfast this morning at City Hall. In spite of the fact that it was the early hours of the morning, many supporters came out to socialize and to celebrate this milestone in our community. I believe it is worthy of celebration to mark the City of Yellowknife joining and being the 125th member of the United Way.

Mr. Speaker, for those of us who have been around for a while, we are aware of the many incarnations and the setbacks this idea of the United Way in YK has had to endure over many, many years, but for the commitment and tenacity of the board members, volunteers and many supporting organizations, the United Way would still be at an idea stage. For that, I would like to salute and congratulate all those who have made the United Way possible in Yellowknife.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to congratulate the Government of the Northwest Territories for agreeing to facilitate payroll reduction programs for those employees who are interested and willing to donate in that manner. As the biggest employer in the Territories, I know that it is setting an important precedent, and hopefully pave the way for many other organizations to follow.

Mr. Speaker, I believe this is a very positive action for many in our community and I look forward to seeing much success for this newly minted organization. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today I would also like to speak to the issue of the now withdrawn application of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation. This subject of utilities and the regulation of those utilities is a very complex matter. I had the experience of sitting on the board of directors of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation for three years and I do not purport to be any kind of an expert on that subject, even after that close-up experience.

However, what I do know is that I had some very serious concerns about the process that was underway and I do support the intervention by this government as the shareholder. To move from community-based rates to a single zone, flat rate across the North is a major shift in how revenue is raised for the Power Corporation. In fact, conventional wisdom was that community-based rates were a fair way to raise revenue, given that a well-conceived form of territorial support was in place to act as the mechanism to offset the cost in communities where rates were higher than those in Yellowknife, so in fact the territorial support program did have the same net effect of levelizing the rates.

Given the Power Corporation's desire and intention to move away from its rate structure, and given the unquantified resulting impacts from such a shift, some very preliminary research and key consultations did not occur. Regular Members of this Legislature, for example, were not given an adequate opportunity to engage in the debate in this manner. Mr. Lafferty has spoken today about our style of consensus government, so this was a really key piece that was missing from this particular initiative, the consultation with the Regular Members.

Once the application was filed, some would argue that anyone who wished to intervene had an opportunity to enter that debate. I disagree with that for a number of reasons. For one thing, as I stated earlier, the regulation of a power utility is very complex and almost always necessitates the costly involvement of people with expertise in that field.

Secondly, the playing field is hardly even, given the seemingly unlimited resources of the utility to advance their side of the argument stacked against the limited financial resources of interveners who may or may not be able to recover their costs. It is safe to say that this debate would have cost millions of dollars and even if everyone's costs were recoverable, the consumer ultimately would have paid for this process.

Mr. Speaker, I want to state that the Public Utilities Board hearing is not the only process available for consultation. A general rate application will still proceed in any event and small communities, as any other individual, will have an opportunity to speak to that general rate application.

Mr. Krutko made reference to the fact that this is the only opportunity small communities have had to put their case forward. In fact, that is not true. They could intervene in any general rate application before the PUB. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

-- Applause

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is good to be back in session. I would like to take this first Member's statement to tell you how happy I am to tell you that I have recovered very, very well from my double-bypass coronary surgery.

-- Applause

In the circumstances that I was in, Mr. Speaker, I had a lot of opportunity, as you can appreciate, a lot of time to reflect on our role here. I must say that the bottom line for me is that I am very, very happy to be back here and to continue my work representing the people of the Northwest Territories and the students and the people who are in need out there. I must say that I feel like I am certainly back to full speed serving this Legislature again.

I was very fortunate to have the services of some very fine medical people to help me through this process. I would like to make reference to several from Stanton Regional Hospital: Dr. John Morse, who is the intern medicine specialist at the hospital. He certainly has the expertise and knowledge, but also a very important element that I felt was very important for someone in my circumstance and others that may go into my type of situation, and that is the compassion he showed for the need I had, but also the understanding that it can be a very traumatic situation for a person to be in.

The other person I would like to mention is Dr. Theresa Hansen, who helped spur everyone on to take good care of me while I was in the hospital here in Yellowknife. And of course, the nurses and the medical staff -- I cannot say enough about the tremendously good work and the wonderful approach that they take to their work in treating patients, Mr. Speaker.

There were many others. The Yellowknife firefighters who handled the ambulance service and the medevac crew and the medevac nurses that take care of you when you are medevaced to the Capital Health Authority in Edmonton.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to all those who sent flowers, cards and books, and who visited me while I was in the hospital. I certainly enjoyed their visits, Mr. Speaker, and want to thank all of my friends and my colleagues who had the opportunity to visit.

I would like to thank Minister Handley for taking over my portfolio during my absence. Last of all, I would like to thank my family, and especially my wife Marg, for the tremendous support she provided. Thank you.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have a Return to an Oral Question asked by Mr. Delorey on June 14, 2002, regarding the reasons for building the North Slave Correctional Facility in Yellowknife.

Standards and criteria for correctional facilities were developed in 1994. These were used to decide where the replacement for the Yellowknife Correctional Centre and the new young offender facility should be located. In 1998, a decision was made to locate these facilities in Yellowknife. This decision was re-examined and confirmed by the Government of the Northwest Territories.

The following are the reasons why the department decided to place the new North Slave Correctional Facility in Yellowknife:

1. Yellowknife has a resident Supreme Court, Territorial Court, JP Court, Court of Appeal, RCMP headquarters, and a large number of resident law firms. As a result, there are more accused people being dealt with in Yellowknife. Many of these must be held in custody before or after their case is finished.
2. The majority of court appearances take place in Yellowknife. A remand centre is required in the city to hold adults and youth in custody pending trial. The North Slave Correctional Facility will provide that remand space. If this facility were built in another community, there would be the additional cost to build and run a remand centre for adults and youth in Yellowknife.
3. Almost every flight in the NWT passes through Yellowknife prior to reaching its final destination. Costs to transport Yellowknife offenders as well as those from points outside of Yellowknife would increase if the facility were built elsewhere.
4. If the new North Slave facility were located in another community, there would be significant relocation or layoff costs. In 1998, it was estimated that these costs could total over $1.5 million.
5. In 1998, it was estimated that the Government of the NWT would save approximately $1.4 million by building a new young offender facility together with the new adult facility. These savings would be lost if these facilities were located separately. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have a Return to Oral Question asked by Mr. Delorey on June 14, 2002, regarding the North Slave Correctional Centre and the lack of comparable facilities in the south to use for cost estimates.

This project is unique. There are no other corrections facilities like it in Canada.

-- Laughter

It not only has maximum, medium and minimum security requirements, but added to this is a healing, spirituality, restorative justice component in the design and programming of the institution. It is also sharing a number of areas with the young offender facility, such as the gym, the kitchen, and the security system, as well as the heating and ventilation systems.

Not only is the facility unique, but design and cost information for southern correctional facilities is limited and is difficult to apply to the NWT for two reasons. First, the North has environmental and technical constraints that are not comparable to the south. Second, the scale of projects in the south is much larger than the North Slave project.

These are not the only reasons why a firm price was not obtained before the project began. In 1998, the fire marshal condemned the Dene K'onia Young Offender Facility for the secure holding of young offenders. The Department of Justice was given until July 1, 2001, to erect new facilities. Under pressure from the fire marshal's order, it was necessary to "fast track" the construction of this project and to use an alternate method of construction. There is no general contractor but instead a construction manager who tenders out various aspects of the job to subcontractors. The drawings for phase one were done incrementally. Drawings for a certain aspect would be done and that job would go out to tender. While that was being done, the design engineers were designing the next stage of construction. Given this approach, it was not possible to get the price for the entire project in advance. Incidentally, the drawings are now complete for the whole project.

Finally, the overheated construction market that is currently being experienced could not be anticipated when the initial project budget was established in 1999. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have a Return to Oral Question asked by Mr. Braden on June 19, 2002, regarding income support programs.

The Government of the Northwest Territories continues to reinvest funds arising from the National Child Benefit, in the Healthy Children Initiative, NWT Child Benefit, and Territorial Workers' Supplement.

The Healthy Children Initiative is administered jointly by the departments of Education, Culture and Employment and Health and Social Services, and provides support and service development in the following five key areas: strengthening young people, healthy babies, building stronger families, supporting parents, and healthy communities.

The Healthy Children Initiative is a community-based program that provides funding to local organizations for the enhancement of existing childhood programs and services for children zero to six years of age and their families. Funding, based on written proposals, is provided to community groups to deliver programs specifically for their community needs. The funding provided through the National Child Benefit reinvestment allows for the delivery of programs that meet the needs of young children and their families.

In Yellowknife, the following Healthy Children initiatives, currently funded through the National Child Benefit reinvestment, are typical of programs supported throughout the NWT:

- Early Intervention Program, NWT Council for Persons with Disabilities;

- Family Support Program, Yellowknife Women's Centre;

- 4 Plus Program (pre-school), Catholic School Board; and

- Parent-Child Resource Centre, Yellowknives Dene First Nation -- N'dilo/Detah.

The NWT also reinvests funds arising from the National Child Benefit in the NWT Child Benefit, which includes the Territorial Workers' Supplement. These are cash payments included in the monthly federal cheque that is sent to all low-income NWT residents. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I have the privilege of being able to recognize some constituents, as well as a board member for Stanton. I would first like to recognize Ms. Bea Campbell, the president of the Northwest Territories Seniors' Society in town for the annual gathering of the seniors.

-- Applause

Mr. Dennis Bevington, the director of the Energy Secretariat, who is going to make straight these complex issues for us.

-- Applause

Mrs. Vina Beaugrain-Champagne, who is a constituent and the mother of my executive secretary, Ingrid.

-- Applause

Finally, last but not least, Mr. Dave Wind, member of the Stanton board. Thank you.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I too would like to recognize Mr. Wind, who is a constituent, in the gallery, and also Barb Wyness, who is a resident of my constituency.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to recognize Major Karen Hoeft from the Yellowknife Salvation Army. She is a constituent of mine and I am very proud of the promotion she made this year from captain to major.

-- Applause

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize several people, but first of all I would like to recognize my wife Margaret who is in the gallery today.

-- Applause

A constituent, Ed Jeske, a well-known Yellowknifer.

-- Applause

Margaret Wilke, who is a member of the YK No. 1 school board.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as Premier, I have a duty to act on the direction of Cabinet, so it is not necessarily my sole prerogative and decision to take action on certain occasions. If the Member is asking about the particular issue regarding the Power Corporation, it was simply clarifying and following a direction set out by Cabinet. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the Cabinet had made a decision in August, a month before the Power Corporation filed an application that we thought was clear, that said the direction was given to defer any further consultation specifically on the one-rate zone. When that was undertaken by the Power Corporation, Cabinet met just recently to reiterate its position and ask for the Power Corporation, through the Minister, to comply with that decision. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, it was my understanding in talking to a number of MLAs that there was not enough discussion at our level to warrant such a massive shift in approach to providing safe, reliable and affordable electrical services, power, and electrical power to the people of the Northwest Territories, and that we needed to have a fundamental discussion about it before a single-rate application could be made to the Power Corporation.

The Public Utilities Board will still require an application to be made to it and it will still require to have hearings and accept presentations. The Power Corporation, we expect, will re-file an application along the lines of what it has been providing up until now, which is a community-based rate.

That will allow individuals, groups and communities to present their case as to how power should be provided to them in the communities and they can talk about the different ways in which that can be provided and seek clarification on issues they wish to have clarified. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the Public Utilities Board is an independent body that conducts hearings in the public interest. The board of the Power Corporation has nothing to do with that at all. The board of the Power Corporation is simply set up to manage the business of the Power Corporation, its assets in the interest of the public as directed by the Government of the Northwest Territories as its owner and single shareholder.

The hearings will resume as soon as the application is resubmitted and consultation will resume with the public as to their views regarding the application of the Power Corporation in the way that the Power Corporation provides service through most of the Northwest Territories to the communities and people.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question is also for the Premier, and it is regarding my Member's statement. I for one totally disagree with the community base rates. I believe that we have to have a system that ensures socio-economic viability of our communities to take on the opportunities of expanding our wealth, but not being in the position right now of having a competitive rate right across the board for everyone. For one, it is not fair. The other reason, it is not economic to pay $2.20 for a kilowatt of power in Colville Lake and pay 10 cents a kilowatt for power in Fort Smith. There is definitely a difference and we have to look at it.

I would like to ask the Premier, what is he going to do to ensure public confidence in the system, ensuring that we do have a public process, that we allow public hearings to take place without political interference by this government?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the rate structure is an issue that is by itself, not able to address the needs of communities. The Public Utilities Board, for the Member's information, had ruled some years ago, and had explicitly rejected a single-rate zone because, as they said at that time, it would result in a massive cross-subsidization of diesel ratepayers by hydro ratepayers. That is, the ratepayers in places like Fort Smith and Hay River and Resolution would have to pay more -- not because it costs more there, but because they would be asked to subsidize the high cost of providing diesel power in other communities. The Public Utilities Board at that time had ruled that was not the business for them to deal with. It was called social engineering and that the issue of subsidies had been dealt with by government.

So the idea had been rejected some years ago. In any case, the hearings are still going to continue and people are going to be heard. I think, more importantly, the energy strategy that this government had undertaken to have delivered to Cabinet for consideration by this Assembly is expected to be prepared and presented in draft form in the next week or so, and that once we have this draft energy strategy, the Cabinet and every Member of the Legislature, along with the public, would have then a broad paper, in which to look at specific issues under which rate zones, subsidies, additional incentives to offset high cost for commercial and industrial users in remote communities would come into play. Conservation, environmental impact...a whole range of issues, under which the specific issues or rate zones could properly be considered.

So the issue was not whether we were attempting to take away public consultation and involvement, but rather to make sure that the context was set so that people, once they started talking and forming opinions, had available to them good factual information and a broad range of considerations under which to formulate their positions, then to present them in a public forum. That was the intent. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it sounds good, but apparently, it does not answer the question. The question is why did this government interfere with a public process that was well on its way? We had people intervening in a public process and who gives justification for this government to...(inaudible)...a public process through a public hearing by the Public Utilities Board?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in early August, Cabinet directed that the Power Corporation should cease consulting on a range of issues, including the single-rate zone. This was not properly communicated, apparently, to the Power Corporation. They went ahead and filed their papers for a single-rate zone in early September. When we had a Cabinet meeting here two weeks ago, we revisited that decision. The decision was maintained and direction was given. They refused to comply, and so their appointments were revoked and a new interim board was put in place. The interim board is expected to withdraw that application and resubmit a new application so that the public process can continue. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I hope this is not the precedent of this government, that we muzzle every public hearing process if this government does not like what the outcome may be. The whole idea of having a public consultation process through a public hearing is to determine what the public thinks and what their opinions are on the different rate structures that are in place. It is not up to us as government. It is the Public Utilities Board.

Again, I would like to ask the Premier, was there a directive passed in Cabinet where a vote took place that clearly spells out how that decision was made a couple of months ago?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A couple of points. One, I think the Member should be aware that Cabinet did not reject any particular proposal. What we said very clearly in August was that further consultation and work on the single-rate zone should be deferred until after a draft energy strategy was completed and presented. So Cabinet itself does not speak in favour or against any particular proposal at this time. I think that is very important to point out, because in all of the discussions to date, I note that nobody has ever bothered to ask me what my position is on this person. It is just an important point to make, that Cabinet did not reject the idea of a single-rate zone. It said very clearly that it should stop consultation on it until an energy strategy is completed. That is an important point to make.

The advice, the direction that we gave, we thought it was clear in August. Our staff thought it was clear. Just to be doubly sure, we revisited the decision and made it explicitly clear. The direction was given. The staff looked at the August decision and legal people looked at it and said the direction was clear. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier up front, was he lobbied in any way by Cabinet Ministers or Members on this side of the House to cancel the public hearing process altogether?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think the question was, was I lobbied by anybody to shut down the public process, and the answer is no.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I stated in my Member's statement my concerns about the proposed changes to the BIP policy. I would like to ask the Minister responsible if he could confirm that the process was open from the time that we were informed of the changes to the Business Incentive Policy, that it was open until September 30th, the date that he gave us, and not the answer that was given to one business from the Business Incentive Policy office? Have there been changes made to the Business Incentive Policy from the time that we were presented the proposed changes to the input that was received September 30th? Did the department make any further changes? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, could the Minister inform this House of the socio-economic benefits, or lack of benefits, that this policy has created over the past number of years that warrant the changes being proposed to this Business Incentive Policy?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am going to leave that question as I put it, because I think that what I was trying to get at is what I mentioned in my Member's statement, that the government has had a hard time quantifying what this policy has done as far as benefits and what the costs were. That is what I was getting at. I hope that the Minister can supply some information to me on that.

One of the business sectors, Mr. Speaker, that seem to have been left out of this, especially the new proposal, this policy, is the manufacturing industry. I will give you one example, Mr. Speaker. For a $70,000 contract, the adjustment in the old policy would have been $10,500. Under the new policy, the adjustment would only be $3,750. This basically represents the freight subsidy that would be extra for a southern company to bid on a contract of that size, not taking into consideration the extra cost of labour and utilities. How does this benefit the manufacturing industry in the Northwest Territories? What is it telling our manufacturing industry in the Northwest Territories under these new proposed changes? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question today is for the Minister of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development. It is a question I have raised in this House before. Leaders of the community of Fort Providence have questioned on several occasions for the department to intervene with this problem that we have been experiencing in Fort Providence. It is regarding the bison that are roaming in the community.

It seems that every fall, we have to tolerate a large number of bison in the community. They are destroying fences. When I left the community on Monday, I saw a large portion of the baseball diamond fence knocked down and the children are having a field day stampeding the herds of buffalo down the streets in between the houses. It is getting to be a serious safety concern. I would like to ask the Minister, what does he plan to do about this issue? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe the Minister is repeating what I just stated, that it is a safety concern and we have to work this out. However, I have been asking this question on many occasions, and the community leaders have requested something to be done about it. What is the department planning to do about it was the question. There has been no response to that. I would like to ask the department, what options are they looking at to solve this problem in the community of Fort Providence? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if it were bears or any other type of wild animals roaming the community, especially if it was the city of Yellowknife or Hay River, those animals would be destroyed. Can the Minister tell me if these animals, these wild bison that are in the community, if they could be destroyed by the community leadership? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is indeed a problem that has been ongoing. We do not know if we can shoot them. We do not know what we can do with them. It is getting to be a more serious concern. I hear what the Minister is saying about meeting with his officials. I would like to request and ask if the Minister would commit to meeting with the leaders of Fort Providence and talk about this very issue? Thank you.