Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, at the meeting in June, if the Minister would care to check the transcript, he will find that it was he, and not the president of the Power Corporation, that was talking about the need to get approval from Cabinet for a single-rate zone application and that he would have to come back and get approval from the Members as well.

Members were led to believe that we were going to be part of the process. Instead we found out in August that we were not. Why was that, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, certainly I will check Hansard for the June meeting. If I misled the committee somehow in believing that you were going to be part of the application process by the Power Corporation, I apologize for that.

The authority to file an application and have it appear before the PUB is clearly within the Power Corporation's responsibility under that act. We cannot change that process unless we change the act. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pursue my questioning on the topic of the Power Corporation with the Minister responsible for this. Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the questions and answers in this area and the lack of humility and sense of responsibility on the part of the Minister is truly alarming, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that we have a consensus system and we do not have a party system. Cabinet Ministers are given more freedom than in any other system, but at the same time, Mr. Speaker, if we are going to have a government, we need to have a Minister that understands the Cabinet direction and follows the direction.

Mr. Speaker, so far what we have is the former chairman of the board who says that he had informed the Minister and had been working on this application for a whole year. That was back in June. Then he got a direction from the Cabinet saying that Cabinet does not approve a one-rate zone and the Minister did not understand this. Cabinet had to rewrite this, reiterate this, and Mr. Kakfwi yesterday stated that. The advice, the direction that he gave is on page 2185:

We thought it was clear in August. Our staff thought that 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 they said the direction was clear.

So unless the Cabinet is totally stupid, or unless Mr. Stewart is totally stupid, someone is not doing his job. Would the Minister not be accountable for that, Mr. Speaker?

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, I would not call Mr. Stewart totally stupid or Cabinet totally stupid. I have respect for Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart had the same record of decision as I had and as everyone else in Cabinet had. He had his interpretation of what that meant and that is what he was working on.

When that was clarified finally on October 8th, then I have followed through on the direction from Cabinet. There was no question at that point, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I agree that Mr. Stewart and all the other distinguished members on that board are well-established business people. They have their expertise in this field. The Minister indicated earlier that somehow Mr. Stewart did not understand this directive. He cannot have it both ways. It was his job to inform the Cabinet that Mr. Stewart had indicated that they were going to go with a one-rate application when they were discussing it.

If the Cabinet did not understand it was his job to go to Mr. Stewart and say that Cabinet's direction is this, moreover, it was his job to consult with the Members, he failed on all three accounts. Does he have any confidence from anybody to do his job anymore, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, I cannot judge whether I have people's confidence to do the job. People have to let me know that, I am not going to guess at it.

I do not think that I ever, at any time, said that Mr. Stewart did not understand the Cabinet directive. What I said is he had his own understanding of it. I had my understanding of it. I think all of Cabinet did. That is different from saying that he did not understand it. I did not say that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If he does not want to speak about his own confidence, I would suggest that he does not have the confidence of Cabinet or the Power Corporation or the new board that would come into the board, that what he says is what Cabinet says. Would he not consider relieving himself of this position as Minister?

Mr. Speaker, no, I would not. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, on the basis of what is going on where the board had totally relied on the Minister's direction and undertook such a major initiative as to apply for a one-rate zone at a cost upwards of $2 million, and then they find out that the Minister actually did not have the direction, how would he have the confidence of the new board that he means what he says and that he has the support of the Cabinet? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I said before, the chairman of the board did not have my interpretation of the Cabinet direction, he had the actual Cabinet direction. It was not my interpretation. He had the document and that is what he based his actions on, not my interpretation. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there have been many, many responses to many questions about this issue. It continues to become muddier with every response. We now have Members saying, is there confidence in this Minister? At the same time, Mr. Speaker, the chairman and the board of directors had an understanding. My understanding from an earlier response is that they saw a record of decision from Cabinet.

The Premier stated in this House that it was a clear decision, it was clear to everybody that they were not to proceed. My question is, and was earlier and I did not get the response, so I am going to go about it in a little different tact here: was the Premier notified by his staff after the filing by the Power Corporation that in fact they were contravening a directive of Cabinet?

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister responsible for the NWT Power Corporation has indicated, the decision of Cabinet was clear. It was conveyed in at least one form to the chair. Apparently he got a copy of the decision. I am not clear what other form of communication there was with the Minister and the chair. The Cabinet decision was clear and the Minister responsible for the Power Corporation was expected to implement the necessary action, or initiate the necessary action as we often phrase it, to implement the decision. It was at the discretion of the Minister to communicate that decision to the Power Corporation in whatever fashion he felt necessary. He has indicated that he was comfortable with simply sharing a copy of the Cabinet report.

When the application was made, I am not certain as to exactly what date and when I was informed of this decision. We, as usual, need to check with the Minister responsible and because it was a Cabinet decision, wait for Cabinet to convene to visit the decision. As I have said before, the decision was clear. We revisited it recently. The Ministers have indicated that they knew exactly what they were discussing and what the decision was made in August. Just to be, as I said, doubly sure and very explicit, we revisited the decision and made it explicit. Thank you.