Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In order to try to clarify this, I will not be laconic in my reply. I want to go back a bit. The Power Corporation and the government were working on the recommendations in the Robertson report going right back to October 2001.

In June, yes, the Power Corporation and ourselves were looking at a one-rate zone and we were trying to see how it would work. In August, on August 6th, the Cabinet met and Cabinet agreed on some strategic direction to the Power Corporation. It also agreed that the government would not continue with public consultation on the Robertson report. The Robertson report included a whole bunch of recommendations, including comment on the one-rate zone.

The chairman of the Power Corporation got a copy of the record of decision. He would have gotten that sometime late the following week. Takes about a week or so to get those out. He gets the actual wording of it. He would have seen it. He, for whatever the reasons were in his interpretation, did not read that to mean that the Power Corporation should cease the direction they were going.

Then we went off to T'loondih and I went on the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association meetings, I was not back in Yellowknife until sometime in mid-September. Meanwhile, there were no questions asked of me and I do not make copies of the records of decisions or interpret them for people. They are, in this case, it was sent out just as it was worded. It came back in the middle of September.

We were busy with business plans, nothing was brought to my attention. In the meantime, the chairman of the Power Corporation did advise me that they filed a report or an application on September 6th. I did not read the application. It went ahead.

On October 3rd, there were questions about the interpretation and what they were doing. We had a Cabinet meeting and that was reviewed at that time. I think you have the rest of the picture from there on.

I do not think there was anything mischievous in this or anything negligent or anything else. When you follow through, it all happened and there was a delay because I was out of the country. No one raised the question with me and that is the whole story to it, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that it is that straight. Mr. Speaker, if you read the transcript of yesterday's debate, Minister Handley refers to the August 6th meeting and the directive as a strategic direction. He also stated that it was not until October 6th that specific direction was given. There is some implication there that Minister Handley is saying that the board did not get that direction until October 6th.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister again, in his understanding, the direction coming out of the August 6th meeting, did it say anything about not pursuing, for the board to not pursue a one-rate zone? Or, to him, does it mean simply not to do the consultation on the Robertson report? I think there is a big difference there. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the decision basically was not to continue consultation on the Robertson report. As I said, there are a number of elements to that and one of those elements is the single-rate zone. The chairman had that information. He did not read it to mean that this says stop your application. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the public records show that as far back as June, the Power Corporation has been working on this one-rate zone application for over a year, and I know that the Minister keeps in close touch with these people. I see them walking around all the time. In the whole year, he got the information from somebody that the corporation is spending $2 million to work on the one-rate zone and then he is in the Cabinet meeting, and I am sure we could assume that some Ministers said that this is a bad idea. Did he not feel that it was his responsibility to be a bridge and be a communicator in-between and say, "Look you guys, the corporation is going to do this. What is my direction?" Did he feel that he could just wait for a month and not do anything about it?

Mr. Speaker, as the Members well know, and as I have said before, in October, 2001, Cabinet directed myself as Minister for the Power Corporation to work on a one-rate zone in October. So that work was going on in October, 2001. It was going on and that direction was changed on August 6, 2002. Yes, we did work on it for almost a year trying to come up with a proposal on it. There was direction October, 2001. There was new direction provided on August 6, 2002. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There is something seriously wrong with this, Mr. Speaker. As Mrs. Groenewegen mentioned in her statement yesterday, I was at the meeting when we were made aware for the very first time that the Power Corporation was pursuing a one-rate application. The Minister was there. This was in late August. This was after Cabinet gave a direction that they were now pursuing this.

Is it not contrary to his role as the Minister to not be dealing with that discrepancy between two organizations that he serves? Does he not see a problem with that, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, yes, and at that time both myself, the secretary to the Financial Management Board and I believe the chairman of the Power Corporation were at the meeting. At the time, we did not have the record of decision in front of us, but we knew from the meeting what the government's position was on the one-rate zone. Mr. Stewart knew, I knew, everybody knew.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to direct my questions to the Minister responsible for the Power Corporation, along with many of my colleagues here to try to bring some clarity to exactly what did transpire here.

Minister Handley just indicated that it was clear to everyone on August 6th what the intention was of Cabinet. I would like to ask Minister Handley then why it was that on August 13th, it was shared with Members of the Assembly in the presence of the president of the Power Corporation that the corporation was proceeding to a general rate application for a flat rate zone on August 13th? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I think the chairman of the Power Corporation did share that information with the committee. I do not think, though, that the chairman of the Power Corporation board felt that because this is the position of the government with regard to a one-rate zone, that automatically translated in his mind into direction that he pull back the work they were doing on the one-rate application.

I believe that in his mind, he felt that this was the direction to go, that there was a public process in place, that people would have a chance to intervene and he would carry on from there. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, this is very confusing. It is little wonder that the Power Corporation was confused and my condolences to its members because I am thoroughly confused by this.

Mr. Speaker, in June, the Minister shared with the Members that there was no way he was going to proceed with a single-rate zone because he knew it was completely un-sellable, that he would never get the communities served by hydro in the South Slave to agree to it. He could never get it past Cabinet, let alone past the Members of this House. That is what was shared with us.

Subsequent to that now, Cabinet met and made a decision to withdraw and defer any further consultation. That information was shared with us by the deputy minister, but the chairman of the Power Corporation, one week after the August 6th meeting, told Members of this House that they were going to proceed with the application for a single-rate zone, and the Minister was sitting right beside the chairman...

The question is, did the Minister, at any time, find it necessary, or think it necessary, to talk to Mr. Stewart, the chairman, and convey to him the decision and the wishes of Cabinet in this matter? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I do not recall the exact wording and so on in a June meeting. I recall the one in the meeting in August. Certainly in June, we as a government had come to the conclusion that the numbers just did not work in a way that we could figure it out for a one-rate zone. In August, the Power Corporation was continuing to work along in that direction. They had continued over the summer. They were continuing with it.

I do not think that they felt they were bound to drop their one-rate application. The direction we had from Cabinet was that we would cease consultation on the Robertson report, and one piece of it did mention the one-rate zone. Now, does ceasing consultation by government on one-rate zone translate into "Board for the NTPC, you better change your application and stop with your plans to put this before the Public Utilities Board?" The chairman did not see it that way and I did not particularly see it that way at that time either. Thank you.