Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have some concerns particularly with the proposed sections in this bill that would authorize municipal governments to run commercial activities. I'll refer to schedule B, Cities, Towns and Villages Act, proposed section 66, which says, "A municipal corporation may provide its services on a commercial basis, including using its equipment, materials and labour, to carry out private works on private property." Mr. Chairman, I think many taxpayers and businesspeople would find this provision somewhat troublesome.

Essentially, this allows municipal governments to compete against the private sector with GNWT money or, even worse, with their own tax dollars. For example, municipal equipment like graders or bulldozers is paid for by MACA or by taxes or a combination of both. This makes for a very unfair competitive advantage because a private construction company would have to finance its own equipment. It might be enough to put some companies out of business or to discourage new companies from starting up. How, I would like to know, would this benefit our communities?

I understand that there has been a concern from the private sector in Alberta, which has similar legislation. For example, there have been instances where municipal governments have underbid private companies on construction contracts in neighbouring communities.

The other concern I have is that taxpayers' money could be put into risky ventures. What happens if the municipal business does not do as well as expected or, worse yet, fails? Does this mean that other programs and services would have to be cut in the community? Does this mean the taxes would have to go up? This should not be allowed to happen.

Mr. Chairman, I understand the concerns with mandatory market disruption policies and I understand that municipalities need revenue, but I think there has to be some mechanism to protect community residents and I do not think we should be restricting municipalities from renting out swimming pools for birthday parties or offering cooking classes. At the same time, I'm not satisfied with the suggestion that voters can have their say in municipal activities once every three years at election time. By the time residents go to the polls it may be too late. Businesses may have gone under and taxpayers' money may have been sunk into bad business ventures.

Mr. Chairman, what I would suggest is that the bill could be amended to require voter approval for any new commercial activities and this would ensure the community residents have a say more than once every three years. Anything a municipality is doing now should be allowed to continue without being subject to voter approval.

At the appropriate time, Mr. Chairman, I will be moving that these amendments be made to the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.