Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, just for the record, when I speak of the Gordian knot, I was speaking more of the difficult problem that was irresolvable at this point, as opposed to Alexander the Great, who split the knot.

The issue the Member raises is a good one. That is a message, an unintended but real message that comes out of this kind of process. I am in discussions with the Deh Cho board as we speak. They have written to me requesting that they be allowed to keep an additional 10 percent of the surplus that they are entitled to under this surplus deficit retention policy. That request is on my desk and we are going to be seriously looking at that. It is not an unreasonable request given the circumstances and the fact that they, in the last few years, have been a paragon of fiscal probity and exemplitude in terms of what we should be striving for. Thank you.

Thank you. That is good to hear. One more question regarding the base funding. I am assuming, and I think I heard the Minister state, that most of these boards will see their base funding increased. I am wondering, although the Deh Cho board and others have not overspent, would there be a review of their actual need and the possibility of increasing their base also? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the rebasing occurred last year to the tune of $4 million, split up across the various authorities. We are currently engaged in the business planning process. As well, like all other arms of government, we are looking at critical investments and areas of priority that require attention. That exercise is being undertaken with all the authorities, as well as the department. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Regarding the community health programs, I would like to ask the Minister, could you spell out exactly what some of those forced growth expenditure items were in regard to the southern placement children? Do you have an idea of what those forced growth items were? What was the cost breakdown?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the pressures are two-fold, as indicated. The number of children requiring services that we were unable to provide in the Northwest Territories and the costs of accessing those services has gone up. The per diem rate in most of the institutions has gone up. As we are discovering with the Capital Health Authority contract, which has not been re-negotiated since 1996, those costs are going up as well.

The statistics show that there are increasing children coming into care for different reasons. Some of them require specialized treatment and facilities, support that we are unable to provide, or that they need support but all of our current facilities are full. Those are the reasons, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask the Minister if he has looked at the possibility of investing dollars into the facilities we have in the Northwest Territories, so we may accommodate more of our children in northern institutions. Maybe look at investing in expanding some of these facilities, so we do not have to send our children to southern institutions. They could be placed in the Northwest Territories.

You mentioned the lack of beds in the Northwest Territories, but we do have facilities in the North. In Inuvik, we have the Charlotte Vehus HHome, where we have a place for disabled children and what not to go.

I think it is important that as a government, if we are seeing a major increase in the cost of programs and services in the southern institutions and if we have the ability to provide those services in the Northwest Territories, we should start looking at expanding those services. We should try to take a more made-in-the-North approach of having these services provided in the North so we do not have to send our people to southern institutions.

I would like to ask the Minister, have you looked at that, knowing the cost drivers are there, the per diem costs are going up? If that service can be provided in the North, have you considered looking at maybe making the investment in expanding some of these facilities or institutions we have here so we can house more of our children in those facilities?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, that is an issue that is always there. Trail Cross, for example, is just finishing some significant renovations and should be re-opened to full capacity, which will allow us to free up some beds that have been out of commission for some time.

The point Mr. Krutko raises is a good one. We just toured the Capital Health Authority facilities down south. We are checking into some of those facilities, not only for children but for adults who may be able to be cared for up North.

We do it in some cases, but it is something that requires constant review, especially if the numbers are going to stay high. I agree with the Member that it makes sense that we look at the needs requirements of the various clients and see how we can best provide those in the North and wherever possible, service adults and children in the North and keep the money in the North. Thank you.

Sorry, Mr. Chairman, but my question has to do with the next section.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My input on this line item is very similar to what was expressed by other Members in the House. It is really hard to see how this decision was made to go with 60/40. I said in committee that I cannot see this as anything else but a result of a decision made by a Minister who chose not to make hard decisions, because I cannot imagine that all of these six financial systems had exactly the same 60/40 problem.

I have to ask, what is Stanton Hospital, for example, supposed to do with this 40 percent deficit that they have to find from within? I do not believe they have the means to come up with an extra budget to make the deficit, because they get most of the money from the government, and the only way to do it is to cut spending on next year's budget.

Given what I have been saying in the House and what the Minister has had to deal with in terms of what is happening there, it is not right to ask the hospital to eat $700,000 from within. I do not know how they can do that without cutting out some services or doing without things that they ought to be able to do. Maybe that is why they closed the ICU. Maybe this is going to give them $700,000. I do not know.

I know that the Minister's answers in the House that new people are getting trained to get ready for the fall, does not go anywhere near addressing this issue. I am told by the health care workers on the street who I run into, or people who choose to get a hold of me, say that they have had a number of near disasters in OR and other places in that facility that provide acute and serious health care services to the people who may be in life or death situations, or a pretty serious health care issue that they need attention paid to.

I am being hard on the Minister because he is in the seat that has to deal with these questions. He is there and he has to answer to that. I need to know what his answer is to the question, what are they supposed to do with all of this deficit? Secondly, I would like to have information on what is the cause of the deficit? Does he have that information on these six items? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest to the Member that the proof of what is doable would be in the pudding, as it were, and that pudding is going to be the deficit recovery plans that are being put forward by the authorities after working with the department on how they are going to address their issues and their portion of the debt.

There is a terms of reference that was done. There has been a commitment made to the Social Programs Committee that we will share those deficit recovery plans as soon as they are in and ready to go, which is very nearly the case. Stanton has worked through theirs in a very positive, proactive way and are to be commended. In the terms of reference, there was some clear points raised, one of them being to make sure that programs are not diminished. The reasons for the accumulated debt are many and it is a very complex issue.

You get into the debate over what is forced growth and what are program enhancements. You get down to the discussion of the rebasing that was done last year, upon a recognition that some of the base budgets were not adequate. I will be showing the Social Programs Committee and this House and Cabinet that the authorities have managed to cope with this particular issue. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have not been here that long. This is my third year, but I have enough corporate memory to know that the last time we dealt with this last year, before he was Minister when we were dealing with the deficit at Stanton, Stanton was working on a debt recovery plan. I appreciate the Minister has to give that sort of answer, but that has no practical meaning. I am sure the Stanton Board or management there could come up with a plan on how they propose to cut this and cut that, or whatever, and work with the Minister because it is the Minister who is funding them.

Surely the Minister is hearing what is going on out there, that all of the staff are working at full capacity. We have a lot of staff there who are working overtime to the point where they take their phones off the hook on the weekend. Someone said she has had overtime pay on her paycheque since December. There are a lot of them who cannot go on holidays unless they shut down their unit, for example, the CT scan. It is actually costing us more money because they have to work with a shortage of staff who have to work overtime and we have to pay them overtime.

You know, I can only speak for Stanton Hospital. I do not know what the examples are for other facilities, but I can tell you that the Stanton Regional Foundation raises millions and millions from the people in Yellowknife. Surely that should make up for the recovery plan. At some point, the hospital needs the money or it does not. The fact that the Minister can demand, or maybe even work with them to come up with a recovery plan, is really meaningless to me.

If it jives in numbers, what is the meaning of that if everything we hear on the street is that this facility is in crisis? One more thing we are going to hand to them is that they are going through a $1,766,000 of deficit, for which the government will pay a million but they are going to have to come up with $700,000. I just do not know, knowing what I know and I am sure what the Minister knows, how we can with a reasonable conscience expect them to deal with that.

I need to know. The Minister did not answer what he knows about what has caused the deficit. I need to know that he is not just arbitrarily saying that he knows they have a deficit problem but he can only come up with 60 percent and they have to eat 40 percent. I know the Minister keeps saying he is the Minister of all the facilities and he has to please everyone, but I believe you have to make a hard decision. You have to look at the details, you have to look at the context and you have to go into the details and see what we can and cannot do. Would the Minister answer that please? Thank you.